ArticlePloS one2024
Defining and prioritizing modifiable risk factors towards the co-creation of a urinary incontinence self-management intervention for older men: A sequential multimethod study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary incontinence (UI), characterized by involuntary urine leakage is a chronic, embarrassing and stigmatizing condition that is under-reported and under-treated). UI is under-prioritized and under-researched, particularly in older men (defined here as men 65+), and there have been calls for more targeted research focusing on this specific group. No existing self-management interventions focus on the needs of older men and none incorporate the perspectives of older men into their development. Furthermore, health inequalities and disparities in continence services for men, and a low level of health seeking behavior in men with UI make it crucial to incorporate their perspectives into intervention development to ensure optimal outcomes. The study will identify risk factors for UI that are potentially amenable to self-management in older men, assess their self-efficacy in managing UI, and determine what modifiable risk factors older men feel are pragmatic to include as part of a self-management program. We will conduct and report a sequential multi-method design consisting of a Delphi study among healthcare experts and a survey among older men with UI, according to the Guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES) Checklist and the Checklist for Reporting Of Survey Studies (CROSS). A geographically dispersed, multidisciplinary group of 30 health care professionals (urologists, geriatricians, family physicians, and nurses) involved in continence care and a representative sample of at least 128 ethnically diverse older men will participate in a Delphi survey and an older men's survey respectively. The healthcare experts will evaluate an evidence-synthesized list of UI risk factors to determine those potentially amenable to self-management. Delphi rounds will be repeated until consensus threshold of 75% is reached. Thereafter, older men recruited via stratified sampling of population subgroups will rate a list of expert-identified potentially modifiable risk factors to indicate which factors they deem practicable and can prioritize. Older men's survey questionnaires will capture information on patients' characteristics (socio-demographics and UI-related items). The Geriatric Self-Efficacy Index for UI (GSE-UI Index) as well as a Likert scale to assess perceived capability and willingness to modify the expert-identified UI modifiable risk factors will be included. Data will be analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively.
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.