Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37760394›Full record

ReviewCancers2023

Artificial Urinary Sphincters for Moderate Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: Current Research and Proposed Approach.

Andrew Johnson, Spencer Mossack, Peter Tsambarlis

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew JohnsonRush Medical College, Rush University, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Spencer MossackDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Peter TsambarlisDepartment of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Rush University Medical Center · USRush University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Male urinary incontinence is a common complication after radical prostatectomy. The severity of incontinence can be assessed in various ways and helps determine the best surgical intervention to restore continence. While most patients with mild incontinence receive a sling and those with severe incontinence receive an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS), there are no clear guidelines on how to manage patients with moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI). Our discussion will focus on the current literature, which demonstrates that an AUS should be considered first-line in men with moderate PPI despite perceived concerns over complications and reintervention rates.

Indexed as

artificial urinary sphinctercontinence surgerymale slingpost-prostatectomy incontinence

Identifiers

PMID37760394
PMCPMC10526785
OpenAlexW4386461625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.