ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2023
Application of the decisional regret scale (DRS) in men undergoing anti-incontinence procedures for stress urinary incontinence.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision satisfaction and regret in patients undergoing ATOMS® adjustable sling for male urinary stress incontinence: data from a third level referral centre.International urology and nephrology · 2026Observational
- Decisional Regret and Long-term Quality of Life After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation Following Radical Prostatectomy.European urology open science · 2026Article
- Global research trends on the links between prostate cancer and postoperative urinary incontinence between 2014 and 2024: a bibliometrics and visualized study.Discover oncology · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Decisional regret (DR) has previously been applied to other urologic issues (hypospadias, prostate cancer). The present study seeks to evaluate certain patient factors that directly correlate to high DR scores in anti-incontinence procedures. Methods: Medical records for 119 patients undergoing anti-incontinence procedures between 2009 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Forty-one patients were accessible for telephone follow-up and provided a Decisional Regret Scale (DRS) questionnaire. If patients had both a sling and an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placed, questionnaires were administered for each. DRS score was quantified in accordance with prior literature, with scores ranging 0-100. We subdivided patients based on demographics and surgical data, correlating this with DRS score. Results: In 41 patients, 46 procedures (13 slings, 33 AUS) were performed. Thirty-nine (95.1%) men underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy, and 11 (26.8%) men reported prior pelvic radiation. Post-procedural continence, irrespective of procedure, yielded an average 2±1.56 pads per day (PPD). Mean DRS score across the cohort was 29.78. DRS score was subdivided into mild, moderate, and severe, with majority noting "none to mild" regret (63%), 15.2% reporting moderate and 21.7% severe. Predictors of higher regret included history of radiation (P=0.056), choice of anti-incontinence procedure (P=0.011), and need for surgical revision (P=0.00042). DR was unrelated to race, complete continence, and time to follow-up. Conclusions: DRS has recently been applied to anti-incontinence procedures for male stress incontinence; our study highlights novel findings not previously assessed. Majority of men had minimal regret with a subset that had significant regret-history of radiation, multiple revisions/explant, and those who elected for sling upfront. These results highlight the importance of patient selection and pre-operative counselling.
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.