ArticleDigital health
A pelvic health eRehabilitation program to address urogenital impairments after breast and gynecologic cancer: A proof-of-concept study protocol.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Incontinence and vulvar pain are common urogenital dysfunctions after breast and gynecological cancers (BGCs). Recent evidence suggests that pelvic health physiotherapy can improve these dysfunctions and enhance quality of survivorship, but several barriers limit access to such care. Virtual programs are proposed as a strategy to improve access. Aim: The main aim of this proof-of-concept study is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the newly designed Pelvic Health eRehabilitation Program in people treated for BGCs. The study also aims to explore the preliminary effectiveness of the Program in reducing urogenital impairments. Methods: This study uses a proof-of-concept, interventional prospective cohort design. Twenty individuals with BGCs presenting with urogenital dysfunction (score ≥2 on the Pelvic Floor Bother Questionnaire) will be recruited in the Canadian provinces of Quebec and Alberta. The Program includes twelve weekly small-group online educational sessions with a pelvic health physiotherapist, five individual exercise prescription sessions, and access to a variety of online resources. The following standardized patient-reported outcome measures will be used: the International Consultation on Incontinence modular questionnaires for bladder and bowel symptoms, the Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire, and the Female Sexual Function Index. Evaluations will be conducted before (E1), halfway through (E2), and immediately after (E3) the intervention. Conclusion: Findings from this study will inform the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the Program for individuals experiencing urogenital dysfunction following BGCs treatment, supporting future development of a randomized controlled trial. This virtual Program holds promise to improve equity in access to pelvic health services.
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.