ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Fear, Shame, and Miscommunication: A Qualitative Study on Treatment Choice for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPelvic organ prolapse (POP) negatively impacts the quality of life of many women. Effective treatment options include the use of a pessary and surgery. This study was aimed at exploring the facilitators and barriers influencing decision-making between pessary and surgical treatment from both the patients' and gynecologists' perspectives.
methodsThis qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with 14 women from the own choice cohort in the PEOPLE study and 12 gynecologists from various hospitals throughout the Netherlands. Participants were purposively sampled to capture a range of experiences and professional backgrounds. The women varied in age and prolapse severity and had differing experiences with both pessary use and surgery, whereas gynecologists represented a mix of junior and senior specialists from academic and regional hospitals. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke.
resultsThree main themes emerged. Treatment goals were a reflection of fears and misconceptions, illustrating the reasons behind women's treatment choices; patient presentation delay as a result of ignorance and shame, addressing the societal taboos surrounding POP; and consultation at the gynecologist with communication gaps and decision-making challenges, highlighting the barriers faced during consultations with gynecologists.
conclusionsOptimal decision-making can be limited because of a lack of knowledge among the general population, patients, and general practitioners. Ignorance and feelings of fear and shame on the subject in patients further hinder the decision-making process. Addressing these barriers could improve the shared decision-making process and enhance patient satisfaction with their chosen treatment.
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.