ArticleCureus2019
Correlation Between Urodynamic and Clinical Diagnoses in Classifying the Type of Urinary Incontinence in Women.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Novel Predictive Model of Detrusor Overactivity Based on Clinical Symptoms and Non-invasive Test Parameters in Female Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urodynamic tests are considered the gold standard for investigating and managing patients with urinary incontinence symptoms. The objective of this review is to determine the correlation between urodynamic and clinical diagnoses in identifying the type of urinary incontinence in pre and postmenopausal women. This is a retrospective review of 116 women with urinary incontinence symptoms that were evaluated clinically initially and then investigated further with urodynamic tests. The results of the urodynamic studies were compared with the diagnosis assigned based on the clinical evaluation. For 69 women, the clinical diagnosis was not confirmed by urodynamic tests. In addition to this, the clinical diagnosis was confirmed by urodynamic investigations in only 38% of the patients. This is in accordance with current literature, which is suggestive that the agreement between urodynamic studies and clinical evaluation in identifying the type of urinary incontinence is poor. Larger definite trials are needed to provide further evidence of the diagnostic value of urodynamic tests in the management of patients with urinary incontinence symptoms.
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.