Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36322174›Full record

ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2023

Current state of bladder diary: a survey and review of the literature.

Shailja Mehta, Bertie Geng, Xiao Xu, Oz Harmanli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urogynecology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Spoti-find: a novel, open-source void spot assay image analysis tool.American journal of physiology. Renal physiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shailja MehtaDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, 310 Cedar Street, FMB 329, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
Bertie GengDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, 310 Cedar Street, FMB 329, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
Xiao XuDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, 310 Cedar Street, FMB 329, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
Oz HarmanliDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, 310 Cedar Street, FMB 329, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA. oz.harmanli@yale.edu.
Yale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisThe objectives of this study are (1) to assess practice patterns among urogynecology/female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) providers regarding the use of bladder diaries (BD) and (2) to review the literature regarding BD.

methodsFor the first objective, a survey was emailed to United States-based urogynecology providers in 2019 querying frequency of use of bladder diaries (F

resultsA total of 371 of 851 (43.5%) contacted providers responded. Nearly 80% were attending physicians, 75.5% of whom completed the FPMRS fellowship; 20.8% of all respondents and nearly 25% of fellowship-trained attendings reported F

conclusionsThe literature supports the use of BD; however, many survey respondents, including fellowship-trained attendings, never or rarely use BD. Most respondents reported difficulty in using BD. More research is needed to improve the ease, accuracy, and widespread adaptation of BD use in clinical practice.

Indexed as

MedicineUrinary IncontinenceFemaleHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesUrinary BladderUrinationBladder diaryFellowship FPMRSPractice patternVoiding diary

Identifiers

PMID36322174
OpenAlexW4307976109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.