Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35500941›Full record

ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2022

Rapid priority setting exercise on faecal incontinence for Cochrane Incontinence.

Katie H Thomson, Nicole O'Connor, Kim Tuyen Dangova, Sean Gill, Sara Jackson, Donna Z Bliss, Sheila A Wallace, Fiona Pearson

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

8 authors.

Katie H ThomsonNIHR Innovation Observatory, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Katie.Thomson@io.nihr.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9614-728X
Nicole O'ConnorEvidence Synthesis Group, Population Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6654-7178
Kim Tuyen DangovaNIHR Innovation Observatory, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2055-2286
Sean GillNIHR Innovation Observatory, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5281-4725
Sara JacksonNIHR Innovation Observatory, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Donna Z BlissSchool of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9972-3377
Sheila A WallaceEvidence Synthesis Group, Population Health Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2853-3653
Fiona PearsonNIHR Innovation Observatory, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1626-0862

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis rapid priority setting exercise aimed to identify, expand, prioritise and explore stakeholder (patients, carers and healthcare practitioners) topic uncertainties on faecal incontinence (FI).

designAn evidence gap map (EGM) was produced to give a visual overview of emerging trial evidence; existing systematic review-level evidence and FI stakeholder topic uncertainties derived from a survey. This EGM was used in a knowledge exchange workshop that promoted group discussions leading to the prioritisation and exploration of FI stakeholder identified topic uncertainties.

resultsOverall, a mismatch between the existing and emerging evidence and key FI stakeholder topic uncertainties was found. The prioritised topic uncertainties identified in the workshop were as follows: psychological support; lifestyle interventions; long-term effects of living with FI; education; constipation and the cultural impact of FI. When these six prioritised topic uncertainties were explored in more depth, the following themes were identified: education; impact and burden of living with FI; psychological support; healthcare service improvements and inconsistencies; the stigma of FI; treatments and management; culturally appropriate management and technology and its accessibility.

conclusionsTopic uncertainties identified were broad and wide ranging even after prioritisation. More research is required to unpick the themes emerging from the in-depth discussion and explore these further to achieve a consensus on deliverable research questions.

Indexed as

Fecal IncontinenceCaregiversConsensusHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesUncertaintyanal incontinencefaecal incontinencefecal incontinence

Identifiers

PMID35500941
PMCPMC9062784

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.