ReviewInternational urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction2009
Review of current status of female sexual dysfunction evaluation in urogynecology.
Review in International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reliability of the Polish Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) and Assessment of Sexual Function before and after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Reconstructive Surgery-A Prospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a short version of the Female Sexual Function Index in the Spanish population.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- Sexual function in older women with pelvic floor symptoms: a cross-sectional study in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sexual dysfunction is a highly prevalent condition in women attending urogynecological services. However, only a minority of urogynecologists screen all patients for female sexual dysfunction. Lack of time, uncertainty about therapeutic options and older age of the patient have been cited as potential reasons for failing to address sexual complaints as part of routine history. Evidence from large prospective studies have shown that prolapse and/or incontinence adversely affect sexual function. Assuming that the physical effect of prolapse and incontinence is one of the contributing factors for sexual dysfunction, one could logically assume that an intervention leading to their improvement should improve sexual function. Current evidence of the effect of conservative and surgical management of pelvic floor disorders on sexual function is encouraging. More research is needed using standardised assessment tools to define clear endpoints in sexual function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.