ArticlePloS one2017
A manometry classification to assess pelvic floor muscle function in women.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of Pelvic Floor Dysfunction in Women with Cervical Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Sexual and bowel function in women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries after perineoplasty and sphincterorrhaphy.Narra J · 2026Article
- The Pelvic Proprioceptive Test (PP-Test): A Novel Pelvic Floor Evaluation in Female Athletes - A Reliability and Observational Study.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2025Observational
- Effect of a Peripheral Neuromodulation Protocol Combined with the Application of Therapeutic Exercise in Patients Diagnosed with Urinary Incontinence-A Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessment of Female Pelvic Floor Muscles: An Integrative Review.International journal of women's health · 2025Review
- Combined effects of high-intensity focused electromagnetic therapy and pelvic floor exercises on pelvic floor muscles and sexual function in postmenopausal women.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2024Article
- Article
- Pelvic floor muscle training in women with urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: A protocol study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Electromyographic Evaluation of the Pelvic Muscles Activity After High-Intensity Focused Electromagnetic Procedure and Electrical Stimulation in Women With Pelvic Floor Dysfunction.Sexual medicine · 2020Article
- Ayurveda management of cystocele, uterine prolapse and weak pelvic floor strength-A case report.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a classification scale for manometry of pelvic floor muscles (PFM) in Brazilian women, according to the modified Oxford scale.
methodsA cross sectional study, with 288 women enrolled in the Maternity, Natal, Brazil. Manometry and PFM strength data were collected and classified according to the modified Oxford scale. A simple linear regression was performed to determine the classification scale of manometry using the modified Oxford scale as the explanatory variable and the arithmetic mean of the manometry measurements as the response variable.
resultsThe average age was 52.80 (±8.78; CI: 51.67-53.93) years. Manometry showed an average of 35.1 (±22.7; CI: 32.1-38.0) cmH2O and most women (29.7%) scored grade 3 on the modified Oxford scale. According to the proposed scale, values between 7.5 to 14.5 cmH2O correspond to very weak pressure; 14.6 to 26.5 cmH2O represent weak pressure; 26.6 to 41.5 cmH2O represent moderate pressure; 41.6 to 60.5 cmH2O represent good pressure, and values above 60.6 cmH2O correspond to strong pressure.
conclusionManometry values were rated on a five-point scale. It is possible to rank the pressure levels performed by voluntary contraction of PFM with this new scale.
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.