Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27771853›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2016

Failure of Expectations in Vaginal Surgery: Lack of Appropriate Consent, Goals and Expectations of Surgery.

Debjyoti Karmakar, Peter L Dwyer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Debjyoti KarmakarDepartment of Urogynaecology, Mercy Hospital for Women, 163 Studley Road, Heidelberg, Melbourne, Victoria, 3084, Australia. dkcoolmed@yahoo.com.
Peter L DwyerDepartment of Urogynaecology, Mercy Hospital for Women, 163 Studley Road, Heidelberg, Melbourne, Victoria, 3084, Australia.
Mercy Hospital for Women · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

backgroundVaginal surgery for the treatment of urinary stress incontinence (USI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) using a synthetic polypropylene mesh is going through a time of unprecedented turmoil and debate. This review focuses on vaginal surgery for vaginal prolapse and looks at the current scientific literature on issues surrounding surgery including consent and expectations. SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF SURGICAL OPTIONS: Synthetic mesh has been used both abdominally and vaginally to improve the effectiveness of POP surgery. The relatively high incidence of mesh complications particularly with vaginal surgery has lead to repeat surgery, disappointment and litigation in some women. The benefits and risks of the various POP procedures are reviewed including native tissue repair, uterine conservation and obliterative vaginal surgery.

conclusionWomen with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and their doctors have many treatment options. The benefits and risks should be discussed as part of shared decision making.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentPatient Care PlanningSurgical MeshFemaleHumansPatient Education as TopicPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPelvic Organ ProlapsePhysician-Patient RelationsPostoperative ComplicationsUrinary Incontinence, StressUterine ProlapseVaginaConsentPatient-reported outcomesSurgical complicationsVaginal surgery

Identifiers

PMID27771853
OpenAlexW2537567890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.