Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40956581›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2025

Remote Access to Urinary Incontinence Treatments for Women Veterans: The PRACTICAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Alayne D Markland, Karen M Goldstein, T Mark Beasley, Emily Malone Boyd, Lisa Zubkoff, Ursula A Kelly, Kathryn L Burgio, Camille P Vaughan

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT04237753 nacompletednot on this map

Optimizing Remote Access to Urinary Incontinence Treatment for Women Veterans

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2020 to 2025Enrolled286ConditionsUrinary IncontinenceArmsVA Video Connect, MyHealtheBladder
NCT05438849 active not recruitingnot on this map

Improving Primary Care Understanding of Resources and Screening for Urinary Incontinence to Enhance Treatment

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamRan2022 to 2026Enrolled3,214ConditionsUrinary IncontinenceArmsMobile Health Application focused on behavioral treatments to treat urinary incontinence, Practice Facilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Alayne D MarklandBirmingham/Atlanta Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs, Birmingham, Alabama, and Atlanta, Georgia.
Karen M GoldsteinDurham VA Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina.
T Mark BeasleyBirmingham/Atlanta Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs, Birmingham, Alabama, and Atlanta, Georgia.
Emily Malone BoydDepartment of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Lisa ZubkoffBirmingham/Atlanta Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs, Birmingham, Alabama, and Atlanta, Georgia.
Ursula A KellyAtlanta VA Health Care System, Atlanta, Georgia.
Kathryn L BurgioDepartment of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Camille P VaughanBirmingham/Atlanta Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs, Birmingham, Alabama, and Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

Research and Mentoring Program in Improving Access to Incontinence Care for Older AdultsK24AG073586 · NIA · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI Alayne Denise Markland · 2022 to 2026
$619k
HSRD VA I01 HX002827NIA NIH HHS K24 AG073586
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Initial treatment for urinary incontinence (UI) includes behavioral treatment. However, access to care may be limited. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of 2 remote modalities for UI behavioral treatments and to assess the effect of a booster video visit for treatment nonresponders. Design, Setting, and Participants: This sequential, multiple assignment randomized clinical trial was conducted in 3 southeastern US Department of Veterans Affairs health care systems from April 2020 through September 2023. Participants were nonpregnant women veterans with UI who had access to email. Interventions: Remote interventions included (1) a mobile health UI app (MyHealtheBladder) with daily sessions delivered for 8 weeks or (2) a single video visit through VA Video Connect delivered by trained UI health care professionals and (3) a randomized booster video visit for women without UI symptom improvement at 8 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in UI symptoms at 12 weeks as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF; score range, 0-21, with higher scores indicating more severe UI) with a minimal clinically important difference of 2.52 defining response status at 8 weeks. The results of the sequential addition of a video booster visit for nonresponders in both randomization groups were also investigated. Primary analyses were assessed using intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Results: Of 286 women veterans randomized (147 to UI app; 139 to video visit), 244 (85%) received an intervention. Their mean (SD) age was 53.2 (11.3) years (range, 23-83 years). At 12 weeks, ICIQ-UI SF scores for the UI app group decreased -3.6 (95% CI, -4.4 to -2.8) points compared with -2.3 (95% CI, -3.1 to -1.5) points for the video visit group (P = .02). In the UI app nonresponder group at 8 weeks (n = 29 [20%]) with the booster video visit (n = 12), ICIQ-UI SF scores changed -1.0 (95% CI, -2.4 to 0.4) points vs -1.2 (95% CI, -1.3 to 3.7) points for 10 UI app nonresponders who continued UI app treatment (P = .10). In the video visit nonresponder group (n = 61 [44%]) with the booster video visit (n = 23), ICIQ-UI SF scores changed -0.9 (95% CI, -2.1 to 0.3) points vs -0.3 (95% CI, -1.9 to 1.2) points in 30 video visit nonresponders who continued treatment (P = .58). The change in ICIQ-UI SF scores for the UI app reached the MCID threshold (2.52 points) in 4 weeks (-2.9 [95% CI, -3.8 to -2.0] points), whereas the video visit group did not reach this threshold until 24 weeks (-3.4 [95% CI,-4.2 to -2.5] points). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial comparing 2 remote delivery modalities of behavioral UI treatment with randomized booster visits among women veterans found that UI symptoms improved earlier for the UI app intervention compared with the video visit intervention, without reaching a meaningful clinical between-group difference at 12 weeks. The addition of a booster video visit did not further improve UI symptoms. Further research could extend these modalities to broaden access to behavioral UI treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04237753.

Indexed as

Urinary IncontinenceVeteransAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsTelemedicineTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40956581
PMCPMC12441875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.