ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2025
Innovations in Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Narrative Review.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Post-Surgical Evaluation in Stress Urinary Incontinence by Transperineal Ultrasound and Quality of Life Questionnaire-A Retrospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- IGF-1 Increases Collagen Deposition by Dermal Fibroblasts: Applications for Tissue Engineering.Cells · 2026Article
- Effects of Pelvic Floor Muscle Training in Pregnant and Postpartum Women: A Systematic Review.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- The cerebro-pelvic axis: a unified framework linking higher brain function, pelvic floor control, and lower urinary tract dysfunction.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Laser for lower-urinary tract symptoms.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2025Article
- Advantages and Disadvantages of Commonly Used Urinary Incontinence Questionnaires-How to Correctly Choose Questionnaire in Urinary Incontinence Diagnosis?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Reconciling Methodological Paradigms Toward More Accurate Evaluation of Personalized Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) Intervention in Standardized Trials: Introducing the TRIPLE-TCM Trial Framework.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary incontinence is characterized by the involuntary leakage of urine. The primary cause of stress urinary incontinence in women is the weakening of the pelvic floor muscles. Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a significant global health problem that impacts mainly middle-aged women, with a severe impact on their quality of life. Traditional diagnostic methods and treatments often fail, although technological innovations have improved diagnostic accuracy, such as specific questionnaires or transperineal ultrasound. While medical therapies and surgical procedures are continuously being developed, controversies about the correct choices regarding diagnostic and treatment methods continue to exist. The aim of our review was to identify the innovative diagnostic tools and effective treatment procedures for SUI. A narrative review was conducted due to the heterogeneity of the studies. New methods for diagnosis and treatment have gained ground, and we have covered them in our review; however, the field continues to expand. A personalized approach to diagnosis is also a requirement because of the limitations of conventional urodynamic studies, and we emphasize the importance of such personalization in enhancing clinical decision making. Future medical strategies that combine both preventive and therapeutic care are desirable. Newer technologies were brought to light in this review, including stem cell therapy and laser therapy.
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.