ReviewUrolithiasis2016
The preventive treatment of recurrent stone-formation: how can we improve compliance in the treatment of patients with recurrent stone disease?
Review in Urolithiasis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Promoting fluid intake to increase urine volume for kidney stone prevention: Protocol for a randomized controlled efficacy trial of the sipContemporary clinical trials · 2024Article
- Patient compliance to dietary recommendations: tips and tricks to improve compliance rates.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Proposal for the User-Centered Design Approach for Health Apps Based on Successful Experiences: Integrative Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Review
- Vision for the future on urolithiasis: research, management, education and training-some personal views.Urolithiasis · 2019Review
- Acceptability of Mobile Health Technology for Promoting Fluid Consumption in Patients With Nephrolithiasis.Urology · 2018Article
- Timelines of the "free-particle" and "fixed-particle" models of stone-formation: theoretical and experimental investigations.Urolithiasis · 2017Review
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
Whether prevention of Urolithiasis is worthwhile is the outcome of the balance between efficacy of prevention and costs and efforts related of respectively prevention and treatment of a new stone. Well controlled trials demonstrate that effective prevention of new stone formation is possible using medical treatment and lifestyle interventions. In long-term general practice the results obtained with preventive interventions is disappointing. Low and diminishing long-term compliance to the intervention is a major cause for this. Both the long-term aspect and the natural resistance to lifestyle changes contribute to this low compliance. From an analysis of the existing data on trials of preventive interventions and from experiences obtained in other patient groups where lifestyle changes are applied I will make the case that self-empowerment of the patient using m-health lifestyle coaching (a smart phone application) can considerably enhance the level of prevention that is obtained in general practice. In conclusion, I will describe what features will improve usage and efficacy of such an app.
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.