Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31231510›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2019

Recent advances in pelvic floor repair.

Emma Mironska, Christopher Chapple, Sheila MacNeil

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2019. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emma MironskaDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Kroto Research Institute, University of Sheffield, Red Hill, Sheffield, S37HQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6840-2554
Christopher ChappleUrology Department, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2JF, UK.
Sheila MacNeilDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Kroto Research Institute, University of Sheffield, Red Hill, Sheffield, S37HQ, UK.
University of Sheffield · GBRoyal Hallamshire Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are conditions which result in significant physical, mental and social consequences for women worldwide. The high rates of recurrence reported with primary repair for POP led to the use of synthetic mesh to augment repairs in both primary and secondary cases following failed previous POP repair. The widely reported, unacceptably high rates of complications associated with the use of synthetic, transvaginal mesh in pelvic floor repair have severely limited the treatment options that surgeons can offer. This article summarises the recent advances in pelvic floor repair, such as improved quantification and modelling of the biomechanics of the pelvic floor and the developing technology within the field of tissue engineering for treatment of SUI/POP, including biomaterials and cell-based therapies. Finally, we will discuss the issues surrounding the commercial introduction of synthetic mesh for use within the pelvic floor and what lessons can be learned for the future as well as the current guidance surrounding treatment for SUI/POP.

Indexed as

Pelvic FloorPelvic Organ ProlapseUrinary Incontinence, StressFemaleHumansSurgical Meshgynaecologyincontinencemeshpelvic organ prolapsePOPprolapsestress urinary incontinenceSUItissue engineeringurologywomens health

Identifiers

PMID31231510
PMCPMC6556996
OpenAlexW2948324539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.