Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27495276›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in obstetrics & gynecology2016

Predicting urinary incontinence after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

John E Jelovsek

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

John E JelovsekObstetrics, Gynecology & Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States.
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

The Cleveland Clinic Clinical SiteU10HD054215 · NICHD · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI BARBER, MATTHEW D · 2006 to 2015
$3.2M
NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD054215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMany women choosing to have surgery for pelvic organ prolapse also choose to undergo continence surgery. This review focuses on available evidence that clinicians may use to counsel patients when choosing whether to perform continence surgery and how predictive analytic tools improve this decision-making process. RECENT

findingsMidurethral sling, Burch cystourethropexy and bladder neck sling are highly effective for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Trials demonstrate that continence surgery may be routinely performed to reduce the risk of postoperative incontinence in women undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse with or without preoperative stress urinary incontinence. Although these procedures are effective and well tolerated on average, media concerns, regulatory warnings and litigation reinforce the need for a balanced discussion regarding efficacy and potential adverse events directed at the individual patient during the preoperative visit. Advances in predictive analytics allow surgeons to quantitate individual risk using algorithms that tailor estimates for the individual patient and facilitate shared understanding of risks and benefits. These models are less prone to cognitive biases and frequently outperform experienced clinicians. SUMMARY: This review discusses how predictive analytic tools can be used to improve decisions about continence surgery in the woman planning to undergo prolapse surgery.

Indexed as

Suburethral SlingsAgedFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansHysterectomyMiddle AgedPelvic Organ ProlapsePostoperative ComplicationsRiskSurgical MeshUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, StressUrologic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID27495276
PMCPMC5377916
OpenAlexW2508762091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.