Observational studyLower urinary tract symptoms2025
A Repeatability Study of Measurement of Micturition With Voiding Sonography and Uroflowmetry of Asymptomatic Women.
Observational study in Lower urinary tract symptoms, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Ultrasound Measures of Bladder Neck Location and Movement During Pelvic Floor Contraction or Straining Relate to Bladder Neck Support During Voiding?Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Article
- A Repeatability Study of Measurement of Micturition With Voiding Sonography and Uroflowmetry of Asymptomatic Women.Lower urinary tract symptoms · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to assess the intra- and inter-tester repeatability of voiding sonography measures in asymptomatic women and to examine the effect of perineal transducer placement on uroflowmetry.
methodsA prospective observational study of 32 asymptomatic women was conducted using ultrasound with simultaneous uroflowmetry. Participants completed four voids (two per day). The ultrasound transducer placed on the perineum assessed bladder neck and urethral displacement during micturition. On Day 1, a void with ultrasound and uroflow recorded by a sonographer was compared to a void recorded with uroflowmetry only to determine whether the transducer placement affected voiding. On Day 2, two sonographers evaluated the voids with ultrasound and uroflowmetry. Each sonographer measured their own images. One sonographer also made measures on the images recorded by the second sonographer. Uroflowmetry measures and void patterns were evaluated. The repeatability of ultrasound measures was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1) and Bland-Altman analysis, and t tests examined the transducer's impact on uroflowmetry.
resultsSome changes in flow rate and flow pattern (20% of participants) were observed with placement of the transducer. Most sonographic measures showed good to excellent inter- and intra-tester repeatability, and between measures made by the different testers on the same image. During void, bladder neck and urethral diameter were more repeatable if measures were made at the time of maximum flow estimated from the simultaneous uroflowmetry.
conclusionVoiding sonography is both feasible and repeatable. Perineal transducer placement affected micturition for some individuals. Voiding sonography combined with uroflowmetry shows promise for a noninvasive urogynecology functional assessment.
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.