ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
Evaluation of proudP A sound-based approach to uroflowmetry.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. 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.
- The Future of Urodynamics: Innovations, Challenges, and Possibilities.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe sought to assess the performance of the proudP artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm, integrated into a mobile application, in estimating uroflow curves and parameters using recorded urination sounds.
methodsA direct comparison was made between the peak flow rate (Qmax), voided volume (VV), and uroflow curves predicted by the proudP algorithm and those obtained through established validation methods. A hardware uroflow simulator replicated uroflow profiles by precisely controlling water flow rates and extracting corresponding sound data. Ten uroflow profiles, representing typical patterns observed in male subjects, were selected. Simulation experiments with proudP were conducted using a standard toilet setup. The uroflow simulator was calibrated to reproduce uroflow profiles, and validation was performed against a Flowmaster uroflowmetry device. Statistical analysis included descriptive summaries, Bland-Altman analysis, and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) analysis.
resultsThe proudP accurately captured various uroflow patterns generated by the simulator, with low standard deviations in Qmax predictions and biases near zero. The standard deviations of voided volume were slightly larger, primarily due to uroflow patterns with extended voiding times. The study validated the accuracy of proudP against in-office uroflowmetry, demonstrating robustness across different smartphone models.
conclusionsProudP proved to be as accurate as in-office uroflowmetry in estimating uroflow rate across various patterns. Its convenience in home monitoring offers patients a means to observe their urination patterns accurately, while enabling healthcare professionals to gain detailed insights remotely. ProudP emerges as an essential solution for clinical practice and urological research.
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.