Trial reportScientific reports2025
Exploring the application of an integrated health behavior change-based nursing model in pelvic floor muscle self-training.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 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.
- Effects of early pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation combined with continuity of care on pelvic floor electromyography and postpartum depression in women with postpartum uterine prolapse.Frontiers in global women's health · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To examine the effect of the Integrated Theory of Health Behavior Change (ITHBC) model on self-efficacy, adherence, and rehabilitation outcomes in pelvic floor muscle training among postpartum women. This study recruited primiparas who underwent vaginal delivery at five medical institutions in China between January 2020 and January 2025. Participants were randomly assigned to either the ITHBC nursing model combined with conventional care group (observation group) or the conventional care group (control group). Outcomes included compliance with pelvic floor muscle training, self-efficacy, pelvic floor function, muscle strength, surface electromyography, ultrasound parameters, quality of life, and nursing satisfaction. The observation group showed better performance than the control group in terms of compliance, self-efficacy, and nursing satisfaction. Statistically significant differences were observed in pelvic floor function and quality of life pre- and post-intervention, with the observation group outperforming the control group post-intervention. For pelvic floor muscle strength, statistically significant changes occurred pre- and post-intervention; however, no significant difference was found in type I muscle fiber fatigue degree between groups. Surface electromyography showed significant improvements pre- and post-intervention, with the observation group performing better across most indicators except endurance contraction variability. Ultrasound parameters revealed no significant differences in bladder detrusor muscle thickness, residual urine volume, or bladder neck initial position but showed significant differences in other parameters, with the observation group performing better overall except for the right anal angle. The ITHBC model shows promise for improving adherence and short-term pelvic floor function, but further validation in diverse populations is needed.Clinical Trial Number: www.chictr.org.cn, ID: ChiCTR2300070607. Registered on 18/4/2023.
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.