Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20645076›Full record

ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2011

Pelvic pain in urogynaecology. Part I: evaluation, definitions and diagnoses.

Tilemachos Kavvadias, Kaven Baessler, Bernhard Schuessler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urogynecology journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Myofascial pelvic pain.Current pain and headache reports · 2012
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Recognizing myofascial pelvic pain in the female patient with chronic pelvic pain.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN
    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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tilemachos KavvadiasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Cantonal Hospital of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland. tilemachos.kavvadias@ksl.ch
Kaven Baessler
Bernhard Schuessler
University of Lucerne · CHCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim of this review is to summarise the available literature on the definitions and assessment of pelvic pain in the urogynaecological patient. A MEDLINE search and a hand search of conference proceedings of the International Continence Society and International Urogynecological Association were performed. Sixty-nine articles were reviewed. The site of pain was specified in 45% of the articles, 20% used the digital examination of pelvic myofascial trigger points for the diagnosis; 20%, the Pelvic Pain and Urgency/Frequency Symptom Scale; 26%, the Interstitial Cystitis Symptom and Problem Index and 39%, a simple visual analogue scale. The diagnosis was interstitial cystitis in 67% and chronic pelvic pain in 19% of the articles. Consensus on the diagnostic procedures and definition of pelvic pain in the urogynaecological patient should be achieved in order to provide exact diagnostic information which will lead to more satisfying treatment options.

Indexed as

DyspareuniaFemaleGynecological ExaminationGynecologyHumansPain MeasurementPelvic PainSurveys and QuestionnairesUrologic DiseasesUrology

Identifiers

PMID20645076
OpenAlexW2083551790

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.