ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020
Pelvic organ prolapse and treatment decisions- developing an online preference-sensitive tool to support shared decisions.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The development of a decision aid to support treatment choice in pelvic organ prolapse: a Delphi study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Interpretable personalized surgical recommendation with joint consideration of multiple decisional dimensions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Enhancing Collaboration and Patient-Centered Care Through Moderated Multidisciplinary Consultations.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Anterior Colporrhaphy and Paravaginal Repair for Anterior Compartment Prolapse: A Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Model to support intervention prioritization for the control of Aedes aegypti in Brazil: a multi-criteria approach.BMC public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFemale patients with pelvic organ prolapse and clinicians need to take decisions regarding treatment that are often unpredictable in relation to how they impact the future everyday lives of the patients. This study formed the developmental phase of a larger study to develop and test an online tool to support shared decision-making.
methodsPatients, health care professionals and other stakeholders participated in the development and evaluation process of this tool. The collected data was generated from observational studies, exploratory interviews with prompt cards and workshops with end users from four Danish gynecology outpatient clinics.
resultsContent analysis led to important themes. For the patients three themes emerged: 1) how the impact of symptoms on everyday life affected the need for relief, 2) their bodily perception and sex life and 3) their worries about the future. For clinicians the different symptoms and their severity was a main theme.
conclusionsThis article provides an overall description and discussion of the development methodology. It demonstrates how user involvement informed the prototyping process and how patients' preferences were included in the final prototype. Whether the tool actually increases SDM, remains to be tested in a pilot feasibility study.
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.