ReviewCurrent urology reports2024
The Use of Uroflowmetry as a Diagnostic Test.
Review in Current urology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond urodynamics: non-invasive approaches to diagnosing detrusor underactivity in men with lower urinary tract symptoms - a systematic review.BMC urology · 2025Pooled it
- Fucoidan fromResearch and reports in urology · 2026Trial
- Comparison of Free Uroflowmetry and Pressure-Flow Study Parameters: A Retrospective Analysis in Non-Neurogenic Male Patients.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Observational
- Smartphone-AI videouroflowmetry evaluation (SAVE study): a concordance study with standard uroflowmetry.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Predicting poor early voiding pattern after holep using maximum flow rate (Q-max) as an objective outcome.World journal of urology · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewUroflowmetry is widely used for initial non-invasive evaluation of lower urinary tract disorders. Current clinical use is mostly restricted to a scrutiny of the maximum flow rate and uroflow pattern recorded by a conventional flowmeter in a health care facility. There are several advancements in our understanding and in available technologies that promise to transform clinical utilization of this simple test. RECENT
findingsSeveral aspects of the uroflow test in addition to maximum flow rate and uroflow pattern show potential diagnostic utility. This includes flow acceleration, uroflow indices, uroflow-electromyography including lag time, stop uroflow test, and uroflow-based nomograms. There are initial attempts to use artificial intelligence in analysis. There is also new data with regard to factors influencing variability of uroflow testing that might influence the diagnostic value in as yet uncertain ways including diurnal variability, postural variability, locational variability, and operator variability. There are new technologies for uroflow testing in a home environment allowing for easy repetition. However, there are several challenges owing to a paucity of clinical data and standardization. There are also critical lacunae in terminology that need to be addressed. There are exciting new advancements in the field of uroflowmetry. However, there is need to standardize and validate the newer uroflow tracing analyses and technologies.
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.