ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2025
Bladder Diary Feasibility and Reliability in Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Patients.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesBladder diary (BD) is an important tool to understand patients' lower urinary tract symptoms. But few data exist on adult neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (ANLUTD) patients. The aim was to assess in real-life practice the feasibility, reliability and influencing factors of BD completion in patients with ANLUTD. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll patients with ANLUTD who had a first neuro-urologic consultation between January 2022 and April 2023 were included. No patients underwent intermittent self-catheterization. We collected demographic data, validated questionnaires about symptoms and quality of life, the presence and analysis of the 3-day BD. BD was classified as feasible if patients returned it nonempty and was deemed reliable if patients had completed at least 2 consecutive days, if it did not have an intake-output imbalance, and if it were consistent with the USP questionnaire. We investigated influencing factors of feasibility and reliability with a general linear regression.
resultsOne hundred and nighty-nine patients were included (mean age 56 ± 14; 111 (55.7%) women). Eighty-four (42.2%) had demyelinating disease, 55 (27.6%) Parkinson's disease, 51 (25.6%) neuro-genetic disorder and 7 (4.5%) spinal cord injury or cauda equina syndrome. BD were classified as feasible for 128 (64%) patients and 45 (40.5%) were deemed reliable. In a generalized linear model, no factor was associated with BD feasibility or reliability.
conclusionsIn a ANLUTD population, the BD is a feasible tool, but its interpretation should be met with caution due to its limited reliability. No factor was associated with the feasibility or reliability of the BD.
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.