Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31450258›Full record

SynthesisRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2019

Do Women have Adequate Knowledge about Pelvic Floor Dysfunctions? A Systematic Review.

Júlia Ferreira Fante, Thais Daniel Silva, Elaine Cristine Lemes Mateus-Vasconcelos, Cristine Homsi Jorge Ferreira, Luiz Gustavo Oliveira Brito

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04893005 (Knowledge Level of Pelvic Floor in Different Age Groups), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT04893005 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Knowledge Level of Pelvic Floor in Different Age Groups

TypeobservationalSponsorMarmara UniversityRan2021 to 2021Enrolled1,215ConditionsPelvic Floor Disorders
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Validation of the Hungarian version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ).European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Júlia Ferreira FanteFaculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Thais Daniel SilvaFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Elaine Cristine Lemes Mateus-VasconcelosFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Cristine Homsi Jorge FerreiraFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Luiz Gustavo Oliveira BritoFaculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7364-4718
Universidade de Ribeirão Preto · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe sought to investigate whether women present adequate knowledge of the main pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) (urinary incontinence - UI, fecal incontinence - FI, and pelvic organ prolapse - POP). DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was performed in the MEDLINE, PEDro, CENTRAL, and Cochrane databases for publications from inception to April 2018. SELECTION OF STUDIES: A total of 3,125 studies were reviewed. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of primary outcomes and the diversity of instruments for measuring knowledge. The quality of the articles included in the analysis was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) adapted for cross-sectional studies. DATA COLLECTION: Two authors performed data extraction into a standardized spreadsheet. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nineteen studies were included, comprising 11,512 women. About the methodological quality (NOS), most of the studies (n = 11) presented a total score of 6 out of 10. Validated questionnaires and designed pilot-tested forms were the most frequently used ways of assessing knowledge. Some studies were stratified by race, age, or group minorities. The most used questionnaire was the prolapse and incontinence knowledge questionnaire (PIKQ) (n = 5). Knowledge and/or awareness regarding PFD was low to moderate among the studies. Urinary incontinence was the most prevalent PFD investigated, and the most important risk factors associated with the lack of knowledge of the pelvic floor were: African-American ethnicity (n = 3), low educational level (n = 4), low access to information (n = 5) and socioeconomic status (n = 3).

conclusionMost women have a gap in the knowledge of pelvic floor muscle dysfunctions, do not understand their treatment options, and are not able to identify risk factors for these disorders.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePelvic Floor DisordersAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31450258
PMCPMC10316817
OpenAlexW2970298961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.