ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2023
Development of a conceptual framework for a new patient-reported outcome measure for pain in women following mesh surgery for pelvic floor disorders: a qualitative study.
Article 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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Assessment of a New Pain-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Pelvic Floor Surgery Using Exploratory Factor Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Patient and Clinician Feedback to Inform the Development of a New Pain-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Pelvic Floor Surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- Developing items for inclusion in a new pain-specific patient-reported outcome measure for pelvic floor surgery: a mixed-methods study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) collects both clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data on women undergoing surgery using a prosthesis such as mesh for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The registry lacks a suitable instrument to assess pain in women following mesh surgery for SUI and POP. This qualitative study describes the views on pain following mesh surgery in women and clinicians through the development of a conceptual framework, which may inform the development of a new instrument for the APFPR.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with women following mesh surgery for POP and SUI (n=17) and clinicians (n=6) in Victoria, Australia. We sought to reveal aspects of any sort of pain after a pelvic floor procedure. Interviews covered sensation, region, continuity of pain, triggers, and the mode and method of administration for a new pain-specific patient-reported outcome measure. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.
resultsWe identified the important components of pain felt by women with POP and SUI after surgery using mesh. From the seven themes outlined, a conceptual framework was developed compiling related components of pain into six specific domains.
conclusionsThis study identifies the important components of pain felt by women following mesh surgery. It is hoped that the development of a pain-specific PROM, as supported by clinicians, will assist in the timely and appropriate diagnosis and management of POP and SUI.
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.