ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2015
Refractory overactive bladder: a common problem?
Review in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revision and Explantation After Permanent Sacral Neuromodulation for Overactive Bladder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- UROREC: A cystometry and electromyography recording system for analyzing urinary incontinence parameters in rat models.PloS one · 2026Article
- Observational
- What Are Realistic Expectations to Become Free of Overactive Bladder Symptoms? Experience from Non-interventional Studies with Propiverine.Advances in therapy · 2022Article
- Article
- Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in the Treatment of Overactive Bladder.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Novel targeted bladder drug-delivery systems: a review.Research and reports in urology · 2015Review
- Urethral Pressure Variation: A neglected contributing factor in patients with overactive bladder syndrome?International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisUnsatisfactory treatment outcome sometimes is described as frequently occurring in patients treated with first-line therapy for overactive bladder (OAB). The present article reviews the different circumstances which may result in failure to respond to lifestyle interventions, behavioral therapy, and/or antimuscarinic treatment.
methodsAn extensive literature search was conducted to identify relevant articles on pathophysiological, clinical, and pharmacological aspects of refractory OAB.
resultsMissing definition, unrealistic individual expectation of treatment outcomes, lack of communication between physician and patient as well as pathophysiological and pharmacological processes were identified as relevant for failure to respond to first-line OAB treatment. Increase of patient's motivation to adhere to the prescribed treatment, critical examination of the patient in regard to the initial diagnosis, and individual adjustment of antimuscarinic therapy may be appropriate tools to improve treatment outcome in OAB patients.
conclusionsOverall, the incidence of refractory OAB seems to be overestimated. There are several approaches to improve therapy results.
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.