ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Subtypes and symptoms of fecal incontinence in the Dutch population: a cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of clinical and paraclinical characteristics of patients with urge, mixed, and passive fecal incontinence: a systematic literature review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Vaginal delivery in women with perianal Crohn's disease: why not?AJOG global reports · 2024Article
- Clinical characteristics of phenotypes of fecal incontinence.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
- Fecal Incontinence: The Importance of a Structured Pathophysiological Model.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2022Review
- Non-dynamic graciloplasty is an effective treatment for patients with passive fecal incontinence.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo study the distribution of subtypes and symptoms of fecal incontinence in the general Dutch population.
methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study in a representative sample of the general Dutch population. All respondents (N = 1259) completed the Groningen Defecation and Fecal Continence questionnaire. We assigned the respondents to a so-called healthy subgroup (n = 1008) and a comorbidity subgroup (n = 251). The latter subgroup comprised the respondents who reportedly suffered from chronic diseases and who had undergone surgery known to influence fecal continence. We defined fecal incontinence according to the Rome IV criteria.
resultsThe combination of urge fecal incontinence and soiling was the most frequent form of fecal incontinence in the total study group, the "healthy" subgroup, and the comorbidity subgroup (49.0, 47.3, and 51.5%). Passive fecal incontinence was the least frequent form of fecal incontinence in all three groups (4.0, 5.4, and 2.2%). The prevalence and severity of fecal incontinence was significantly higher in the comorbidity subgroup than in the "healthy" subgroup. Only in the comorbidity subgroup did the fecally incontinent respondents feel urge sensation significantly less often before defecating than their fecally continent counterparts (16.5 versus 48.8%, P < 0.001).
conclusionUrge fecal incontinence combined with soiling is commonest in the general Dutch population. Chronic diseases and bowel and pelvic surgery both increase and aggravate fecal incontinence.
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.