Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32217918›Full record

ArticleFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2020

Reasons Behind Preferences for Community-Based Continence Promotion.

Heidi W Brown, Meg E Wise, Tamara J LeCaire, Emilie J Braun, Anna M Drewry, Emily M Buttigieg, Maria Macco, Jodi H Barnet, Andrew Bersch, Paul E Peppard and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

13 authors.

Heidi W BrownFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.
Meg E WiseSonderegger Research Center, School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin - Madison.
Tamara J LeCaireSurvey of the Health of Wisconsin, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Emilie J BraunFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.
Anna M DrewryFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.
Emily M ButtigiegFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.
Maria MaccoFrom the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.
Jodi H BarnetSurvey of the Health of Wisconsin, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Andrew BerschSurvey of the Health of Wisconsin, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Paul E PeppardSurvey of the Health of Wisconsin, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Kristen M C MaleckiSurvey of the Health of Wisconsin, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
F Javier NietoCollege of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
Jane E MahoneyDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
LCenter for Clinical and Translational Science and TrainingUL1TR001425 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI MEINZEN-DERR, JAREEN, STRAWN, JEFFREY ROBERT · 2015 to 2024
$37.5M
INSTITUTIONAL CTSA (UW-MADISON): CLINICAL TRIALSUL1RR025011 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2007 to 2011
$29.5M
Wisconsin Multidisciplinary K12 Urologic Research Career Development ProgramK12DK100022 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CHAD M. VEZINA · 2013 to 2026
$8.6M
Novel population health approach to address CVD and pulmonary health disparitiesRC2HL101468 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI NIETO, F. JAVIER · 2009 to 2010
$5.3M
Expanding the CAARN to accelerate research on multiple chronic conditions with rural and African-American communities and health-care providersR33AG061699 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Dorothy Farrar Edwards, Hongrui Jiang · 2019 to 2026
$5.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001425NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025011NHLBI NIH HHS RC2 HL101468NIA NIH HHS R33 AG061699NIDDK NIH HHS K12 DK100022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aimed to understand the potential reach of continence promotion intervention formats among incontinent women.

methodsThe Survey of the Health of Wisconsin conducts household interviews on a population-based sample. In 2016, 399 adult women were asked about incontinence and likelihood of participation in continence promotion via 3 formats: single lecture, interactive 3-session workshop, or online. Descriptive analyses compared women likely versus unlikely to participate in continence promotion. To understand format preferences, modified grounded theory was used to conduct and analyze telephone interviews.

resultsOne hundred eighty-seven (76%) of 246 incontinent women reported being likely to attend continence promotion: 111 (45%) for a single lecture, 43 (17%) for an interactive 3-session workshop, and 156 (64%) for an online program. Obesity, older age, nonwhite race, prior health program participation, and Internet use for health information were associated with reported continence promotion participation. Cited advantages of a single lecture included convenience and ability to ask questions. A workshop offered accountability, hands-on learning, and opportunity to learn from others; online format offered privacy, convenience, and self-directed learning.

conclusionsMost incontinent women are willing to participate in continence promotion, especially online.

Indexed as

AgedFecal IncontinenceFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPatient PreferenceQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesUrinary Incontinence

Identifiers

PMID32217918
PMCPMC7329600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.