ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2026
Development and validation of a risk prediction model for urinary retention after pelvic floor reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate and analyze the factors affecting postoperative urinary retention (POUR) after pelvic floor reconstruction, and to construct and validate a risk prediction model.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 258 pelvic floor reconstruction patients (2023-2024) from a Southwest China tertiary hospital. Patients were classified into POUR and non-POUR groups and split 7:3 into training and internal validation cohorts. Predictors were identified through univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis to construct a Nomogram model. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test evaluated the model's differentiation, calibration, goodness-of-fit, and predictive performance.
resultsIndependent POUR risk factors were: urinary retention history (OR = 10.008, 95% CI 1.368-73.195, P = 0.023), heart disease (OR = 14.416, 95% CI 2.872-72.376, P = 0.001), number of vaginal deliveries (OR = 1.569, 95% CI 1.076-2.289, P = 0.019), and maximal urinary flow rate (OR = 0.845, 95% CI 0.76-0.94, P = 0.002). The AUC values of the training cohort and internal validation cohort were 0.812 (95% CI 0.726-0.899) and 0.822 (95% CI 0.703-0.941), respectively. Calibration curves indicated good agreement between predicted and observed values, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test demonstrated high predictive accuracy (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThe nomogram model effectively predicts POUR risk, aiding early perioperative identification of high-risk patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.