ReviewRisk management and healthcare policy2025
Attitudes and Perceptions of eHealth Among Female Patients with Urinary Incontinence and Healthcare Providers: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis.
Review in Risk management and healthcare policy, 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.
- Barriers to Seeking Medical Consultation for Urinary Incontinence: A Nationwide Population-Based Study in Saudi Arabia.Lower urinary tract symptoms · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize qualitative evidence to explore the promoters and barriers to implementing eHealth interventions from the perspective of female patients with urinary incontinence and healthcare providers. Background: Guiding patients to pelvic floor muscle training through eHealth can effectively improve urinary incontinence symptoms, and understanding the attitudes and perceptions of patients and healthcare providers is critical to the successful application of eHealth. However, systematic reviews that combine both views are lacking. Design: A systematic review of qualitative research and thematic synthesis. This was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2020. Date Sources: The search period was from the establishment of the database to May 2024, and eligible English literature was searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE databases. Review Methods: Two researchers independently screened and included the literature and used the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool (CASP) to evaluate the methodological quality of the included literature. Themes were developed using thematic synthesis. Results: A total of nine studies were included, which included 678 patients and 13 healthcare providers. Four themes were condensed into ten categories: multiple motivations for eHealth use, diverse reasons for taking action, complex reasons for preventing action, and conflict in establishing eHealth use behaviors. Conclusion: The majority of patients are enthusiastic about utilizing eHealth to train their pelvic floor muscles, although there are occasionally issues like low desire. Although some medical practitioners are not well versed in eHealth, their engagement can aid patients in making use of eHealth. The future should focus on the difficulties and needs of women with urinary incontinence during the use of eHealth exercise and improve the understanding of eHealth among healthcare personnel.
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.