Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12137680›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Urodynamic investigations for management of urinary incontinence in adults.

C M Glazener, M C Lapitan

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Can preoperative urodynamic studies predict de novo stress urinary incontinence following advanced pelvic organ prolapse surgery?Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Urodynamic assessment of urinary incontinence.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India · 2010
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C M GlazenerHealth Services Research Unit (Foresterhill Lea), University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK, AB25 2ZD. c.glazener@abdn.ac.uk
M C Lapitan
University of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrodynamic tests are used to investigate people who have urinary incontinence or other urinary symptoms in order to make a definitive objective diagnosis. The aim is to help to select the treatment most likely to be successful. The investigations are invasive and time consuming.

objectivesThe objective of this review was to discover if treatment according to a urodynamic-based diagnosis led to clinical improvements in urinary incontinence, compared to treatment based on history and examination. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group trials register. Date of the most recent search: April 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing clinical outcomes in groups of people who were and were not investigated using urodynamics, or comparing one type of urodynamics against another. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Authors of one study were contacted for more information, including adverse effects. MAIN

resultsTwo small trials involving 128 women were included. In one small trial, women who were investigated with urodynamics were more likely to receive active treatment with drugs or surgery. However, the numbers in both trials were too small to determine if this affected clinical outcomes such as a reduction in incontinence. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsA larger definitive trial is needed, in which people are randomly allocated to management according to urodynamic findings or to standard management based on history and clinical examination.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansTreatment OutcomeUrinary IncontinenceUrodynamics

Identifiers

PMID12137680
OpenAlexW1731092220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.