Observational studyMedicine2016
Acute Urinary Retention During Pregnancy--A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study in Taiwan.
Observational study in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Acute urinary retention in the first and second-trimester of pregnancy: Three case reports.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Transabdominal ultrasound-guided Gartner's abscess drainage, a rare cause of acute urinary retention in second trimester of pregnancy.BMJ case reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the epidemiology and risk factors of acute urinary retention (AUR) during pregnancy. We included all cases of pregnancies with AUR reported in Taiwan's Longitudinal Health Insurance Database from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2011. Cases of AUR onset 1 day before delivery were excluded. The Cochrane-Armitage trend test and logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate the age distribution and types of deliveries of pregnant women. Chi-square tests and Fisher's exact test were performed to examine the association among all covariates. The odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated. We identified 308 cases of AUR in 65,490 pregnancies. The risk of AUR during pregnancy was 0.47%. The peak incidence occurred between the 9th and 16th gestational weeks. Patients who experienced preterm delivery exhibited the highest risk for AUR (2.18%). Those with post-term delivery had the second highest risk (0.46%), and patients with a normal delivery exhibited the lowest risk (0.33%). Compared with normal delivery, preterm delivery carried a higher risk of AUR (OR: 6.33, 95% CI: 4.94-8.11). The AUR risk was higher for patients with advanced maternal age (>35 years old) than it was for those in the younger group (< 20 years old) (OR: 2.62, 95% CI: 1.18-5.81). Within the normal delivery group, higher incidences of urogenital infection, gestational diabetes mellitus, previous abortion, abnormal pelvis, disproportion, and endometriosis were noted in women with AUR than in those without AUR (all P values <0.05). Women with advanced maternal age and those who experienced preterm delivery had an increased risk for AUR. The peak incidence of AUR in normal pregnancies occurred between the 9th and 16th gestational weeks. Urogenital infection, gestational diabetes mellitus, previous abortion, abnormal pelvis, disproportion, and endometriosis were associated with AUR in women who underwent a normal delivery.
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.