ReviewActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2026
Female pelvic floor protection-Where do we have to go?
Review in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pelvic floor protection has a growing awareness and importance in long lasting strategies to provide female pelvic floor health. This state-of-the-art review article aims to summarize important future directions in this area. A literature search has been conducted within the last 20 years with pelvic floor protection-specific search terms. Four major work packages have been identified. (1) Epidemiology and risk stratification. (2) Mechanistic and translational research. (3) Diagnostic and preventive strategies. (4) Implementation and knowledge translation. A systematic literature search was performed and after assessing inclusion criteria and quality on expert opinion, 82 out of 1636 articles were included. The alignment for future research has been part of the analysis as well as ways of how to implement evidence based information to a day-to-day clinical routine.
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.