ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Identification of Key Factors Influencing the Choice of the Type of Vaginal Pessary for Women Presenting with Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Semi-Directive Interviews and Development of an Algorithm.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of questions by patients with pelvic organ prolapse about vaginal pessaries resulting in a checklist for their physicians.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) can be managed using a vaginal pessary. However, the decision-making process whereby health professionals choose the right pessary is unclear. The objective of this study was to focus on the experience of experts in pessary use and to propose an algorithm. (2) Methods: A prospective study, based on face-to-face semi-directive interviews and group discussions, was conducted on a multidisciplinary panel of professional experts specialized in pessary prescriptions. A consensual algorithm was established, and its accuracy was assessed by expert and non-expert panels. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) were used. (3) Results: 17 semi-directive interviews were conducted. The parameters involved in the decision-making process regarding the choice of vaginal pessaries were: desire for self-management (65%), associated urinary stress incontinence (47%), POP type (41%), and POP stage (29%). The algorithm was developed step by step (4 iterations) using the Delphi technique. Most of the expert panel (76%) rated the relevance of the algorithm as 7 or more out of 10 on a visual analog scale according to their own experience (reference activity). Finally, most (81%) of the non-expert panel (
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.