ArticlePloS one2024
A protocol for the co-creation and usability/acceptability testing of an evidence-based, patient-centred intervention for self-management of urinary incontinence in older men.
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.
- Development of a mobile application for urinary diary monitoring in overactive bladder management.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Male urinary incontinence (UI) is most prevalent in older men, with one in three men aged 65 and above having problems maintaining continence. Addressing health inequalities, male-female disparities in continence services, and low health-seeking among men emphasizes the necessity for co-creating an intervention that empowers them to self-manage their UI. We aim to co-create a self-management intervention with an older men and Health care provider (HCP) group and assess its usability and/or acceptability among older men with UI. The intervention mapping (IM) framework, a co-creation strategy, will be used to co-create a self-management tool, followed by usability and/or acceptability testing. The study will be guided by the first four IM steps: the logic model of the problem, the logic model of change, program/intervention design, and program/intervention production, followed by preliminary testing. A participatory group of older men with UI recruited from an existing group of patient partners, and continence care experts will be involved in all steps of the IM process. Usability and/or acceptability testing will be conducted on a sample of 20 users recruited through seniors' associations and retirement living facilities. After accessing the self-management tool for a week, participants will complete a product usability testing scale (aka System Usability Scale-SUS) and/or an acceptability test, depending on the preferred mode(s) of intervention delivery. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics. A benchmark overall mean usability score of 70 represents a good/usable product, based on the large database of SUS scores.
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.