ArticleObstetrics & gynecology science2020
The effect of parity on the function of pelvic floor musculature in the long term: cross-sectional study.
Article in Obstetrics & gynecology science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual and bowel function in women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries after perineoplasty and sphincterorrhaphy.Narra J · 2026Article
- Perineal muscle strength as a predictor of stress urinary incontinence among young parous women in Mangaluru India.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Is Pelvic Floor Muscle Resting Activity Associated with Pelvic and Genital Pain, Dyspareunia, and Pelvic Floor Muscle Contraction? A Cross-Sectional Study of Women with Endometriosis.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of Pelvic Floor Muscle Strength in Women With Vaginal Delivery and Caesarean Section After 1-3 Years:Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2025Article
- Repercussions of perineal repair using surgical glue or suture thread on postpartum outcomes: A controlled randomized clinical trial in São Paulo, Brazil.European journal of midwifery · 2024Article
- Psychometric evaluation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ-IR) in Iranian reproductive age women.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Translation and measurement properties of the pelvic floor distress inventory-short form (PFDI-20) in Iranian reproductive age women.BMC women's health · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveParity is associated with an increased risk of pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of parity on this musculature.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was completed at the Department of Physical Therapy, Federal University of São Carlos, Brazil. In total, 143 women participated in the study and were classified into three groups according to parity: nulliparae, primiparae, and secundiparae women. All parous participants had last given birth between 1 and 6 years prior. Pelvic floor muscle function was assessed through unidigital vaginal palpation using the PERFECT scheme, with the contraction grade classified according to the Modified Oxford Scale and through manometry.
resultsThere was no difference in scores on the Modified Oxford Scale (the means and standard deviations were 2.5±0.8 in nulliparae women, 2.3±0.9 in primiparae women, and 2.2±0.9 in secundiparae women; P=0.482) and manometry findings (the means and standard deviations were 42.3±22.7 in nulliparae women, 35.0±21.8 in primiparae women, and 33.2±20.0 in secundiparae women; P=0.144) among the assessed groups.
conclusionParity had no effect, regardless of mode of birth, on the function of pelvic floor muscles and the presence of urinary symptoms, such as long-term urinary incontinence after birth.
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.