ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2026
Patients' priorities in kidney stone disease.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2026. 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.
- Quality of Life in Patients with Ureteral Stones: Translation and Validation of the Brazilian Version of the Cambridge Ureteral Stone PROM (Br-CUSP).International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Validation of the Brazilian Version of the Cambridge Renal Stone Patient-Reported Out-come Measure (Br-CReSP) versus a Generic Questionnaire for Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Nephrolithiasis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEngaging with patients and the public is essential to design and deliver impactful research. Enhancing the relevance of research and tailoring treatments to align with patients' preferences can facilitate improved clinical care.
methodsWe aimed to identify the research, support and treatment priorities of individuals with kidney stone disease (KSD) using a 25-question survey in inpatient and outpatient urology departments.
resultsForty-four individuals with KSD responded to our survey; 28 (64%) had experienced multiple KSD episodes and 11 reported 5 or more episodes. Median self-rated quality-of-life (QoL) impact (0 = negligible; 10 = severe) was 7.00 out of 10.00 (interquartile range [IQR]: 5.00-9.00), equivalent in individuals with single and recurrent stone episodes. Pain (
conclusionsOur findings emphasise symptoms contributing to reduced physical and psychological wellbeing in patients with KSD. We highlight the need for research into developing therapies to prevent stone recurrence, alleviate pain and slow stone growth, and for educational materials. Responses indicate an appetite for personalised medicine and oral medications in KSD.
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.