Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33252091›Full record

ReviewJournal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine

Urologic guidelines for the care and management of people with spina bifida.

David B Joseph, Michelle A Baum, Stacy T Tanaka, Dominic C Frimberger, Rosalia Misseri, Rose Khavari, Sharon Baillie, Elizabeth B Yerkes, Hadley Wood

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Neurogenic Bladder in Children with Myelomeningocele.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. What has changed in pediatric neurosurgical care in spina bifida? A 30-year UAB/Children's of Alabama observational overview.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

David B JosephUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Children's of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Michelle A BaumBoston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Stacy T TanakaVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Dominic C FrimbergerChildren's Hospital of Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
Rosalia MisseriIndiana University School of Medicine, Riley Children's Health, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Rose KhavariHouston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA.
Sharon BaillieParaquad NSW, Newington, New South Wales, Australia.
Elizabeth B YerkesAnn and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Hadley WoodCleveland Clinic, Glickman Urologic and Kidney Institute, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Funding

Comp A-Developing the Spina Bifida Collaborative Care NetworkU01DD001077 · DD · SPINA BIFIDA ASSOCIATION · PI THIBADEAU, JUDY KAREN · 2014 to 2018
$3.1M
ACL HHS U01DD001077NCBDD CDC HHS U01 DD001077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe life expectancy for people with spina bifida has increased, thus resulting in greater need for guidelines in urologic care in order to protect normal renal function, to develop strategies for urinary continence, and to advance independence through adult years.

methodsThe English literature was assessed from 2002-2015; greater than 300 publications identified. Case reports and opinion pieces were eliminated leaving 100 for in depth review. Clinical questions were then established for each age group that allowed for focused assessment.

resultsThere was no Level 1 evidence for any of the defined clinical questions. This resulted in group consensus for all questions throughout all age groups. Guidelines were provided for identifying a symptomatic urinary infection, the role of urodynamic bladder testing and identification of bladder hostility, determining methods of renal function assessment and surveillance, the initiation of continence control, and transitioning to self-care through the teen and adult years.

conclusionUrologic guidelines continue to be based on clinical consensus due to the lack of high level evidence-based research. Further research is required in all aspects of urologic management. While not the "Standard of Care," these guidelines should be considered "Best Practice".

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleSpinal DysraphismUrinary BladderUrinary Bladder, NeurogenicUrodynamicsYoung Adultmyelomeningoceleneural tube defectsneurogenic bladderSpina bifidaspinal dsyraphism

Identifiers

PMID33252091
PMCPMC7838970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.