Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18528608›Full record

ReviewInternational urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction2008

Why do stress and urge incontinence co-occur much more often than expected?

Vatche A Minassian, Walter F Stewart, Annemarie G Hirsch

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Clinical epidemiological insights into urinary incontinence.International urogynecology journal · 2017
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Vatche A MinassianDivision of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA 17822, USA. vaminassian@geisinger.edu
Walter F Stewart
Annemarie G Hirsch

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assuming stress and urge urinary incontinence (UI) are independent, mixed UI prevalence is 17 times higher than expected. We consider three explanatory models. We summarize evidence from previous studies on whether common Risk Factors, Liability (i.e., one UI subtype increases risk of the other), or Severity model (i.e., mixed UI represents an advanced and more persistent stage of a progressive disorder) explains the unexpectedly high prevalence of mixed UI. We found little support to indicate that the excess prevalence of mixed UI is explained by common risk factors. In contrast, evidence does indicate that onset of one UI subtype increases risk of onset of the other subtype. Finally, although the Severity model is intuitively attractive, there is little epidemiologic evidence to support it. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine which model offers a dominant explanation for the high prevalence of mixed UI.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalRisk FactorsSeverity of Illness IndexUrinary Incontinence, StressUrinary Incontinence, Urge

Identifiers

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.