Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38919293›Full record

ReviewIranian journal of public health2024

Worldwide Prevalence of Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zahra Hadizadeh-Talasaz, Talaat Khadivzadeh, Taraneh Mohajeri, Masoumeh Sadeghi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Zahra Hadizadeh-TalasazReproductive Health, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Talaat KhadivzadehNursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Taraneh MohajeriDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Mashhad Medical Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran.
Masoumeh SadeghiDepartment of Epidemiology, Faculty of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse is varied in different countries. For validating the results of numerous studies on the prevalence of Pelvic organ prolapse in the world, a meta-analysis study seems necessary to provide an accurate and valid prevalence for planners and researchers in this field. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the worldwide prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse using the meta-analysis method. Methods: By using valid keywords, searching was done in ISI Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Medline databases, and 22 articles were selected based on inclusion criteria between 2009 and 2021. The quality of articles was checked using The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. Meta-analysis was performed on collected data using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (CMA, Version 2). Meta-analysis of data was done with a random-effects model. The heterogeneity of the study was checked using the I2 index. Publication bias was assessed by the Egger test and funnel graph. Results: The overall prevalence of included studies was 30.9% (95% confidence interval: 24.4-38.2%), ( Conclusion: Studies carried out in different parts of the world have examined the prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse using different tools. Since some cases are asymptomatic, especially in the low stage of prolapse, physical examination of pelvic organ prolapse should be considered an essential tool in evaluating pelvic organ prolapse.

Indexed as

Meta-analysisPelvic organ prolapsePrevalenceSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38919293
PMCPMC11194659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.