Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2025
A Pelvic Floor Muscle Training-Based Complex Intervention for Community-Dwelling Older Women with Urinary Incontinence: A Feasibility Study and Process Evaluation.
Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. 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.
- Pelvic floor muscle training in managing female stress urinary incontinence.Bioinformation · 2026Article
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
Purpose: Urinary incontinence is a common health issue among older women, negatively affecting quality of life. Although pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is recommended as the first-line treatment, its uptake remains low. We previously developed a PFMT-based complex intervention to improved adherence and implementation fidelity among community-dwelling older women. This study aimed to test its acceptability and feasibility. Patients and Methods: This study consisted of two parts. First, a cluster randomized controlled pilot trial was conducted in Changsha, China. Four community daycare centers were randomly assigned to the intervention arm (receiving the PFMT-based complex intervention) or the control arm (receiving health education). Primary outcomes were the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the complex intervention. Additionally, a mixed-method process evaluation was conducted to assess the implementation fidelity and the contextual factors influencing the implementation outcomes, with quantitative data collected from research logs and qualitative data from interviews, respectively. Results: From October 2023 to January 2024, the pilot trial enrolled 36 eligible older women, with 22 in the intervention arm and 14 in the control arm. Compared with health education, the complex intervention demonstrated greater acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility, with mean differences and corresponding 95% confidence intervals being 1.25 (0.19, 2.31), 1.25 (-0.02, 2.53) and 2.29 (0.78, 3.81), respectively. The process evaluation revealed that the complex intervention was implemented successfully, with 48% of the approached older women enrolled and intervention content delivered as planned. However, low motivation, monotonous content, limited promotion and inadequate attention were identified as barriers requiring further improvement. Conclusion: Our preliminary findings indicate that the PFMT-based complex intervention, developed with consideration of participants' preferences and implementation influence factors, is acceptable and feasible. These findings support a larger confirmatory trial and indicate that future research should further improve data collection strategies, adopt objective outcome measures, and optimize intervention components.
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.