SynthesisBJU international2025
Classification systems for chronic pelvic pain in males: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review the classification systems for male chronic pelvic pain (CPP).
methodsThe Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), and Web of Science were searched. Any publication, with no restriction to publication date, was eligible. Publications had to propose a classification system for CPP in males or provide additional information of a system that had been identified. Systems were assessed with an adapted Critical Appraisal of Classification Systems tool.
resultsA total of 33 relevant publications were identified, with 22 proposing an original classification system. Systems aimed to: (i) diagnose CPP and/or differentially diagnose CPP from other conditions, (ii) differentially diagnose subtypes within CPP, or (iii) identify features that could inform underlying mechanisms and/or treatment selection. Conditions referred to as chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome were most represented. Clinical signs/symptoms, pathoanatomical investigations, and presumed pain mechanisms were used for classification. Quality of systems was low to moderate, implying limitations to consider for their interpretation.
conclusionsMany classification systems for CPP in males exist. Careful consideration of their intended purpose is required. Future work should examine whether outcomes for patients are improved when decisions are guided by their use.
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.