ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2016
Discrepancies between patient-reported outcome measures when assessing urinary incontinence or pelvic-prolapse surgery.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of English language patient-reported outcome measures for use in urogynaecology and female pelvic medicine.International urogynecology journal · 2021Pooled it
- Invasive urodynamic investigations in the management of women with refractory overactive bladder symptoms: FUTURE, a superiority RCT and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Trial
- Determinants of Dissatisfaction After Laparoscopic Cure of Vaginal and/or Rectal Prolapse using Mesh: a Comprehensive Retrospective Cohort Study.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- International Urogynecology Consultation: Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROs) use in the evaluation of patients with pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for PFDI-20 and POPDI-6 in POP surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Influence of body mass index on short-term subjective improvement and risk of reoperation after mid-urethral sling surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2018Article
- A national population-based cohort study of urethral injection therapy for female stress and mixed urinary incontinence: the Danish Urogynaecological Database, 2007-2011.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- A new validated score for detecting patient-reported success on postoperative ICIQ-SF: a novel two-stage analysis from two large RCT cohorts.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Patient reported outcome measures after incontinence and prolapse surgery: are the pictures painted by the ICIQ and PGI-I accurate?International urogynecology journal · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisIn order to assess the outcome following surgery for urinary incontinence (UI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) the importance of patient-reported outcome measures, in addition to the clinical objective measures, has been recognised. The International Consultation on Incontinence has initiated the development and evaluation of disease-specific questionnaires (ICIQ) to compare the patient's degree of improvement. Alternatively, the Patient's Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I score) with an inherent before-after assessment has been widely accepted in recent studies. The aim of this study was to compare the PGI-I versus the ICIQ score for women undergoing UI or POP surgery.
methodsThis study is based on self-administered pre- and postoperative questionnaires, completed by women undergoing surgery for UI or POP in Denmark in 2013. Weighted Kappa statistics and 95 % limits of agreement method were used when comparing the PGI-I and ICIQ scores.
resultsAmong the 3,310 women included the PGI-I score showed a higher improvement than the IQIC score, for UI 0.83 (CI 95 %: 0.80-0.85) vs 0.62 (0.60-0.64) and for POP 0.77 (0.75-0.78) vs 0.66 (0.65-0.67).
conclusionsThe PGI-I score renders higher satisfaction than the ICIQ score and the PGI-I score overestimates the improvement following UI and POP surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26407560What 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.