SynthesisEuropean urology2021
A Systematic Review of Patients' Values, Preferences, and Expectations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.
Synthesis in European urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
55 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of NOACs in patients undergoing water vapour thermal therapy (REZUM) for benign prostatic obstruction: a comprehensive review.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Ejaculation sparing of classic and minimally invasive surgical treatments of LUTS/BPH.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Bladder drainage using the coreflow prostatic stent after REZUM therapy.World journal of urology · 2026Trial
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Trial
- Evaluating the impact of digital therapy for male LUTS: insights from the BEST trial subgroup analysis.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Lower urinary tract symptoms in men: the TRIUMPH cluster RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men in primary care using a conservative intervention: cluster randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Trial
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Prostatic Artery Embolization for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023Trial
- Efficacy ofThe world journal of men's health · 2026Article
- The effect of the combination of tadalafil and dutasteride on lower urinary tract symptoms and erectile function in patients with and without a prostatic median lobe.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- The Values and Preferences of People Living With Motor Neurone Disease (MND): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2026Article
- Best of 2025 in prostate cancer and prostatic diseases.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Article
- Sexual and urinary outcomes of minimally invasive surgical therapies for LUTS/BPH: a narrative review.International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
- Treatment Regret in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- [Pharmacotherapy of benign prostatic syndrome : Medications, innovations and future prospects].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- The impact of minimally invasive surgical therapy for Benign prostatic hyperplasia on sexual function: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Review
- MISTs for benign prostatic hyperplasia as first line interventional treatment: Alea iacta est?Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors at 13 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextUnderstanding men's values and preferences in the context of personal, physical, emotional, relational, and social factors is important in optimising patient counselling, facilitating treatment decision-making, and improving guideline recommendations.
objectiveTo systematically review the available evidence regarding the values, preferences, and expectations of men towards the investigation and treatment (conservative, pharmacological, and surgical) of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched electronic databases until August 31, 2020 for quantitative and qualitative studies that reported values and preferences regarding the investigation and treatment of LUTS in men. We assessed the quality of evidence and risk of bias using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) approaches. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We included 25 quantitative studies, three qualitative studies, and one mixed-methods study recruiting 9235 patients. Most men reported urodynamic testing to be acceptable, despite discomfort or embarrassment, as it significantly informs treatment decisions (low certainty evidence). Men preferred conservative and less risky treatment options, but the preference varied depending on baseline symptom severity and the risk/benefit characteristics of the treatment (moderate certainty). Men preferred pharmacological treatments with a low risk of erectile dysfunction and those especially improving urgency incontinence (moderate certainty). Other important preference considerations included reducing the risk of acute urinary retention or surgery (moderate certainty).
conclusionsMen prefer lower-risk management options that have fewer sexual side effects and are primarily effective at improving urgency incontinence and nocturia. Overall, the evidence was rated to be of low to moderate certainty. This review can facilitate the treatment decision-making process and improve the trustworthiness of guideline recommendations. PATIENT SUMMARY: We thoroughly reviewed the evidence addressing men's values and preferences regarding the management of urinary symptoms and found that minimising adverse effects is particularly important. Further research to understand other factors that matter to men is required.
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.