ArticleBMC women's health2026
Shared decision-making among patients undergoing surgery for pelvic floor dysfunction: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC women's health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is a key component of patient-centered care for individuals with pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD); however, evidence on patient satisfaction with decision-making and its associated factors in PFD surgery remains limited.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among patients scheduled for PFD surgery. Structured questionnaires and medical record data were used to evaluate decision-making satisfaction and associated factors.
resultsA total of 123 participants were included, with an average age of 57.24 ± 13.12 years. Regarding decision-making roles, 85.4% (105/123) of patients reported actual involvement in SDM. The mean SDM quality score was 89.02 ± 8.57, and the mean overall satisfaction score was 86.32 ± 12.77. Scores for the four dimensions of overall satisfaction were as follows: information (83.08 ± 16.76); communication and negotiation (82.88 ± 17.16); decision-making (87.80 ± 12.77); satisfaction and confidence (90.77 ± 11.98). Correlation analysis showed that overall satisfaction was positively correlated with all four dimensions of the satisfaction scale, with the strongest correlation observed for the communication and negotiation (r = 0.91), followed by information (r = 0.88), satisfaction and confidence (r = 0.86), and decision-making (r = 0.81). Univariate analysis indicated that surgical procedures, educational attainment, economic status, and residential location were correlation with patient overall satisfaction. Multivariate analysis revealed that SDM quality was the strongest predictor of satisfaction (t = 17.92, β = 0.84, P < 0.001), and independently explained 65.4% of the variance in patient overall satisfaction (F = 50.92, P < 0.001).
conclusionsMost patients reported high actual involvement in SDM and high overall satisfaction. SDM quality was the strongest independent predictor of patient overall satisfaction, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to improve SDM quality and optimize information delivery and communication.
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.