Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40419779›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2025

The views of women and their physicians on decision-making for stress urinary incontinence.

Nienke J E Osse, Karine Gontijo-Santos Lima, Marian K Engberts, Hugo W F van Eijndhoven, Philippe D Violette, Rufus Cartwright, Marco H Blanker, Paul L P Brand

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nienke J E OsseDepartment of Primary- and Long-Term Care, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands. n.j.e.osse@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0666-6538
Karine Gontijo-Santos LimaDepartment of Primary- and Long-Term Care, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marian K EngbertsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Isala Hospital, Dokter Van Heesweg 2, 8025 AB, Zwolle, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9968-2862
Hugo W F van EijndhovenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Isala Hospital, Dokter Van Heesweg 2, 8025 AB, Zwolle, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6118-5676
Philippe D VioletteDepartments of Surgery and Health Research Methods Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, 310 Juliana Dr, Woodstock, ON, N4 V 0 A4, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6116-5496
Rufus CartwrightDepartment of Gynaecology, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Rd., London, SW10 9 NH, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5501-319X
Marco H BlankerDepartment of Primary- and Long-Term Care, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1086-8730
Paul L P BrandDepartment of Medical Education and Faculty Development, Isala Hospital, Dokter Van Heesweg 2, 8025 AB, Zwolle, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1743-4193

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTreatment decisions for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) are preference sensitive, because the disease is non-lethal and there are multiple reasonable treatment options. However, little is known about patients' and physicians' preferred decision-making styles for SUI. To aid physicians in their counselling and decision-making in consultations for SUI, we studied patients' and physicians' preferred and perceived decision-making in medical specialist consultations for SUI.

methodsThis mixed-methods study combined the validated control preference scale (CPS) and the CPS perception version, and semi-structured, in-depth interviews with both patients and physicians. This study took place in Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Sixteen physicians from all three countries and seventeen women from the Netherlands and Canada were interviewed.

resultsAll women expressed a preference for being involved in the decision-making process, either by informative or shared decision-making (SDM) in the CPS, because they valued the autonomy to make their own choice regarding treatment for SUI and appreciated receiving information and advice from their doctor. Physicians also preferred an involved patient, but used medical expertise to steer towards their preferred treatment option. Physicians found SDM difficult to understand, expressing different interpretations.

conclusionsSDM is not a precise concept either for patients or physicians, with multiple interpretations. All patients with SUI want to be involved in the decision-making process, either by informative or by shared decision-making. Physicians both express the desire to involve patients in their decision making, but conversely to steer patients towards the decision that they feel suits them best.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelClinical Decision-MakingDecision MakingDecision Making, SharedPatient ParticipationPatient PreferencePhysician-Patient RelationsPhysiciansUrinary Incontinence, StressAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedMixed-methods studyPatient perceptionsPhysician perceptionsShared decision-makingStress urinary incontinenceTreatment decision

Identifiers

PMID40419779
PMCPMC12106587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.