Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2022
The role of in-person focus groups in the management of urinary incontinence in women from a mixed-methods, randomized pilot study.
Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the quantitative and qualitative components of in-person focus groups as a potential intervention for female patients with urinary incontinence.
methodsWomen over the age of 18 seeking treatment for UI were randomized to standard care with focus group participation or to standard care alone. All participants completed validated questionnaires: MESA, UDI-6, OAB-SAT-q, PGI-S, PGI-I, SQoL-F, PHQ-9, IPAQ at the beginning and conclusion of the study. Questionnaires were analyzed with repeated measures of ANOVA models in an intention-to-treat manner. Three moderated focus group sessions were held and audio recorded. Recordings were transcribed and categorized by frequency into themes using grounded theory methodology.
resultsA total of ten control and eight intervention participants agreed to participate. Seven women attended all three focus group sessions and were included in the final analysis. Transcripts from focus group sessions observed women identified most with (1) urinary incontinence (UI) as a chronic disease, (2) shame managing UI, and (3) social constraints of toileting. Participants self-reported appreciation of focus group participation and desire for on-going sessions. Analysis of the questionnaires did not demonstrate statistically significant differences.
conclusionData ascertained from questionnaires were unable to demonstrate a meaningful effect in improved treatment outcomes for control and intervention participants. Grounded theory analysis of transcripts identified four primary themes: (1) appreciation of the focus group, (2) UI as a gendered issue, (3) lack of public awareness, and (4) history of negative provider interactions. All focus group participants self-reported interest in attending future focus group sessions.
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.