Observational studyInternational urogynecology journal2026
Investigation of Core Stabilization Strength and Pelvic Floor Functions in Patients with Primary Sjögren's Syndrome: A Case-Control Study.
Observational study in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06879444 ("Investigation of 'Core' Stabilization Strength and Pelvic Floor Functions in Individuals with Primary Sjogren), which is not on this 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.
"Investigation of 'Core' Stabilization Strength and Pelvic Floor Functions in Individuals with Primary Sjogren: a Controlled Study"
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThis study was aimed at assessing core stabilization strength and pelvic floor function in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS), as well as identifying factors associated with pelvic floor functionality and that serve as potential predictors.
methodsThis study was planned as a case-control study. Healthy controls consisted of companions of patients with pSS and friends of the authors. A visual analog scale (VAS; to assess vaginal dryness and general pain intensity), McGill Static endurance tests (trunk flexors/extensors endurance, lateral bridge tests), the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20), the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (IIQ-7), and the Sexual Quality of Life-Female, Biopsychosocial Questionnaire (BETY-BQ) were evaluated. The PFDI-20 consists of three questionnaires: the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6), the Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory-8 (CRADI-8), and the Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6).
resultsA total of 29 individuals with pSS and 27 healthy controls were included. In a group comparison, there was a difference in HAQ (p < 0.001), PFDI-20 (p < 0.001), POPDI-6 (p < 0.001), CRADI-8 (p < 0.001), UDI-6 (p < 0.001), IIQ-7 (p < 0.001), and BETY-BQ (p < 0.001) in favor of the healthy group. In pSS, the PFDI-20 has a very strong correlation with the IIQ-7 (r 0.864, p < 0.001); a strong correlation with the HAQ (r 0.668, p < 0.001), the BETY-BQ (r 0.667, p < 0.001); a moderate correlation with trunk flexor endurance (r -0.579, p = 0.003), lateral bridge tests (right) (r -0.479, p = 0.018), VAS-general pain intensity (r 0.440, p = 0.017); a weak correlation with VAS-vaginal dryness (r 0.395, p = 0.034). In regression analysis, the IIQ-7 was the strongest predictor of pelvic floor functionality in pSS (ß = 0.563; p < 0.001).
conclusionsNo group differences were found in core endurance or sexual quality of life. Compared with controls, pSS patients had reduced general and pelvic floor function, greater urinary incontinence, and poorer biopsychosocial status, with urinary incontinence being the strongest predictor of pelvic floor dysfunction.
trial registrationThis study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT06879444.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41538013What 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.