ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2010
Fecal incontinence: part 4 of a series of articles on incontinence.
Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electrical stimulation and biofeedback for the treatment of fecal incontinence: a systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Pooled it
- Triple-target treatment versus low-frequency electrostimulation for anal incontinence: a randomized, controlled trial.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2011Trial
- Functional Assessment of Anal Sphincter with Transperineal Ultrasound and Its Relationship to Anal Continence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aging of the population will make fecal incontinence an increasingly important socioeconomic problem in the coming decades. Already today, the cost to society of treating incontinence with inserts, diapers, and closed systems exceeds the total cost of all cardiac and anti-inflammatory medications.
methodsThis article is based on a selective review of the literature and on clinical experience. No meta-analyses on this topic have yet been published.
resultsSurveys in highly industrialized countries in the Western Hemisphere have shown that about 5% of the population suffers from fecal incontinence of varying degrees of severity. This condition will become more common, in both relative and absolute terms, in the coming decades. Various methods of care and therapy are currently available for fecal incontinence, yet many patients do not seek medical help for it because of embarrassment. Thus, its true prevalence is certainly higher than the surveys imply.
conclusionThe challenge today, therefore, is not just to encourage patients to seek medical help early, but also to raise physicians' awareness of fecal incontinence and their readiness to treat it, so that they can provide competent individual counseling and treatment to all patients who suffer from it.
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.