ArticleRehabilitation oncology (American Physical Therapy Association. Oncology Section)2017
Oncology Section EDGE Task Force on Urogenital Cancer: A Systematic Review of Clinical Measures for Incontinence.
Article in Rehabilitation oncology (American Physical Therapy Association. Oncology Section), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCompared to the general population, women and men with urogenital and colorectal cancer experience higher rates of urinary and fecal incontinence. Although a variety of measures exist to assess these areas, currently, there are no guidelines recommending which outcomes rehabilitation professionals should administer to examine these impairments in those with cancer. PURPOSE: To identify outcome measures for assessing urinary and fecal incontinence and evaluate their psychometric data and applicability to the cancer population.
methodsMultiple electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycInfo) were reviewed using specific search terms to locate articles that identify outcome measures assessing urinary and fecal incontinence. As part of a larger effort to identify outcome measures for both incontinence and sexual dysfunction, 1118 articles were initially identified, 228 articles were reviewed, and 37 outcome measures were selected for analysis, 13 of which were related to urinary and fecal incontinence. Each incontinence outcome measure was independently reviewed and rated by two reviewers using the Cancer EDGE Task Force Outcome Measure Rating Form. Any discrepancies between reviewers were discussed and an overall recommendation for each outcome measure was made using the 4-point Cancer EDGE Task Force Rating Scale.
resultsThe Task Force was able to highly recommend 1 measure addressing urinary incontinence (American Urological Association Symptom Index) and 2 measures assessing both urinary and fecal incontinence (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory - Short Form, Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire - Short Form). The Task Force also recommended two measures of urinary incontinence that demonstrated strong psychometric properties, but had not yet been evaluated in the cancer population (Incontinence Quality of Life Questionnaire, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form). The Task Force was unable to recommend any measures that solely addressed fecal incontinence.
conclusionsFive of the 13 outcome measures assessing urinary incontinence and two of the 13 measures assessing both urinary and fecal incontinence demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and application to the urogenital cancer population and are thereby recommended for use by the Task Force.
Identifiers
29218255PMC5714306W2756268736What 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.