ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Antenatal and Postnatal Screening for Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Using an Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measure.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Female pelvic floor protection-Where do we have to go?Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPregnancy and childbirth are established causes of pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD), but screening for antenatal and postnatal PFD is not routine in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to identify antenatal and postnatal women with PFD using a validated electronic patient reported outcome measure (PROM) and provide targeted intervention based on symptom scores.
methodsDuring the evaluation period, 15,093 patients across three NHS hospitals were invited to complete ePAQ-Pelvic Floor. Invites were sent electronically after ultrasound confirmed viable pregnancy and 16 weeks postnatal. Respondents with scores 50-79 in any domain were triaged to review by a therapy assistant practitioner; scores > 80 to a specialist physiotherapist or urogynaecologist. Responses were divided into antenatal and postnatal cohorts. Mann-Whitney tests were used to assess differences in mean domain scores, with odds ratios calculated for symptom presence (domain score > 0).
resultsA total of 3366 PROMs were completed (response rate 22.3%); 1804 antenatal and 806 postnatal respondents gave consent to data analysis. Mean ages, BMI and parity were 30.3, 27.1 and 0.7 (antenatal) and 31.2, 27.8 and 1.7 (postnatal). Six hundred one patients were triaged to physiotherapy assistants and 150 to specialist review based on symptom scores. Mean domain scores for stress urinary incontinence, bowel continence, pelvic organ prolapse, dyspareunia, body image and general sex life were all significantly worse in postnatal women (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsAntenatal and postnatal patients are at risk of PFD and using electronic PROMs may aid identification of affected women. Further research is needed into optimal instruments, acceptability and improving response rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40944705What 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.