ArticleTrials2024
Effects of different treatment frequencies of electromagnetic stimulation for urinary incontinence in women: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the therapeutic effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with electromagnetic stimulation on pelvic organ prolapse in elderly women using three-dimensional ultrasound parameters.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Functional Magnetic Stimulation in the Management of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction in Children with Asperger Syndrome: A Case Report.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUrinary incontinence is highly prevalent in women while pelvic floor muscle training is recommended as the first-line therapy. However, the exact treatment regimen is poorly understood. Also, patients with pelvic floor muscle damage may have decreased muscle proprioception and cannot contract their muscles properly. Other conservative treatments including electromagnetic stimulation are suggested by several guidelines. Thus, the present study aims to compare the effectiveness of electromagnetic stimulation combined with pelvic floor muscle training as a conjunct treatment for urinary incontinence and different treatment frequencies will be investigated. METHODS/
designThis is a randomized, controlled clinical trial. We will include 165 patients with urinary incontinence from the outpatient center. Participants who meet the inclusion criteria will be randomly allocated to three groups: the pelvic floor muscle training group (active control group), the low-frequency electromagnetic stimulation group (group 1), and the high-frequency electromagnetic stimulation group (group 2). Both group 1 and group 2 will receive ten sessions of electromagnetic stimulation. Group 1 will be treated twice per week for 5 weeks while group 2 will receive 10 days of continuous treatment. The primary outcome is the change in International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form cores after the ten sessions of the treatment, while the secondary outcomes include a 3-day bladder diary, pelvic floor muscle function, pelvic organ prolapse quantification, and quality of life assessed by SF-12. All the measurements will be assessed at baseline, after the intervention, and after 3 months of follow-up. DISCUSSION: The present trial is designed to investigate the effects of a conjunct physiotherapy program for urinary incontinence in women. We hypothesize that this strategy is more effective than pelvic floor muscle training alone, and high-frequency electromagnetic stimulation will be superior to the low-frequency magnetic stimulation group.
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.