Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16702587›Full record

ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2006

The sensitivity and specificity of a simple test to distinguish between urge and stress urinary incontinence.

Jeanette S Brown, Catherine S Bradley, Leslee L Subak, Holly E Richter, Stephen R Kraus, Linda Brubaker, Feng Lin, Eric Vittinghoff, Deborah Grady, Diagnostic Aspects of Incontinence Study (DAISy) Research Group

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03257670 (Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Treatment of Dyspareunia With Fractional CO2 Laser Therapy Versus 4% Topical Lidocaine Gel in the Setting of Breast Cancer Survivors.), which is not on this map. Cited by 81 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03257670 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Treatment of Dyspareunia With Fractional CO2 Laser Therapy Versus 4% Topical Lidocaine Gel in the Setting of Breast Cancer Survivors.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CincinnatiRan2018 to 2022Enrolled70ConditionsDyspareuniaArms4% Topical Lidocaine Gel, CO2RE fractional laser therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

81 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Jeanette S BrownUniversity of California, San Francisco, and San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California 94115, USA. brownj@obgyn.ucsf.edu
Catherine S Bradley
Leslee L Subak
Holly E Richter
Stephen R Kraus
Linda Brubaker
Feng Lin
Eric Vittinghoff
Deborah Grady
Diagnostic Aspects of Incontinence Study (DAISy) Research Group

Funding

Urinary Incontinence: Reproductive/Hormonal Risk FactorsP50DK064538 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI BROWN, JEANETTE S · 2002 to 2011
$11.5M
Polyamine Based Therapy of Squamous Cell CarcinomaR01CA094107 · NCI · LANKENAU INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH · PI O'BRIEN, THOMAS G · 2002 to 2008
$2.3M
INT'L TRAINING AND RESEARCH IN EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEAD43TW000909 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI GUERRANT, RICHARD L · 1997 to 2002
$457k
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW000909NCI NIH HHS R01 CA094107NIDDK NIH HHS P50 DK064538
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary incontinence is common in women. Because treatments differ, urge incontinence should be distinguished from stress incontinence. To make this distinction, current guidelines recommend an extensive evaluation that is too time-consuming for primary care practice.

objectiveTo test the accuracy of a simple questionnaire to categorize type of urinary incontinence in women.

designMulticenter, prospective study of the accuracy of the 3 Incontinence Questions (3IQ) compared with an extended evaluation to distinguish between urge incontinence and stress incontinence.

setting5 academic medical centers in the United States.

participants301 women enrolled from April to December 2004 who were older than 40 years of age (mean age, 56 years [SD, 11]) with untreated incontinence for an average of 7 years (SD, 7) and a broad range of incontinence severity. MEASUREMENTS: All participants included in the analyses answered the 3IQ questionnaire, and a urologist or urogynecologist who was blinded to the responses performed the extended evaluation. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were determined for the 3IQ.

resultsFor classification of urge incontinence and with the extended evaluation as the gold standard, the 3IQ had a sensitivity of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.81), a specificity of 0.77 (CI, 0.69 to 0.84), and a positive likelihood ratio of 3.29 (CI, 2.39 to 4.51). For classification of stress incontinence, the sensitivity was 0.86 (CI, 0.79 to 0.90), the specificity was 0.60 (CI, 0.51 to 0.68), and the positive likelihood ratio was 2.13 (CI, 1.71 to 2.66). LIMITATIONS: Participants were enrolled by urologists and urogynecologists at academic medical centers.

conclusionsThe 3IQ questionnaire is a simple, quick, and noninvasive test with acceptable accuracy for classifying urge and stress incontinence and may be appropriate for use in primary care settings. Similar studies are needed in other populations. We also need a clinical trial comparing the outcomes of treatments based on the 3IQ and the extended evaluation.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPatient SelectionProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUnited StatesUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, Stress

Identifiers

PMID16702587
PMCPMC1557357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.