ArticlePeerJ2026
Urinary incontinence management in Chinese primary health institutions: findings from a regional survey.
Article in PeerJ, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Urinary incontinence (UI) is a prevalent yet under-recognized condition among women in China, impairing quality of life and imposing socioeconomic burden. Primary care providers are pivotal for early detection and first-line management. Unlike Western systems dominated by general practitioners, China' s primary women' s health care is largely provided by gynecologists in county-level or lower-tier institutions. Evidence on their UI-related knowledge and practices is limited, hampering targeted training and policy efforts. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey (March 2023-September 2024) among gynecologists in Fujian primary healthcare institutions recruited via professional WeChat groups. A structured, expert-developed questionnaire assessed demographics, UI-related awareness/perceptions (nine items, max score 18) and clinical practice (12 items, max score 24) on three-point Likert scales. Additional items explored barriers, preferred assessment methods, and factors influencing pelvic floor and bladder training. Reliability and construct validity were tested using Cronbach's α, KMO and Bartlett's tests. Multivariate linear regression identified factors associated with scores. Results: A total of 1,427 gynecologists responded (urban 75.5%; mean age 36.6 ± 9.3 years; 81.7% female). The questionnaire showed high reliability (α = 0.84) and good validity (KMO = 0.88; Bartlett's Conclusions: This first large-scale evaluation of UI-related knowledge and practice among Chinese primary care gynecologists reveals substantial gaps, especially in rural areas. Incorporating UI into continuing medical education, promoting routine screening, updating diagnostic knowledge, and applying digital tools for real-time monitoring of pelvic floor training may improve early detection and care. Tailored interventions addressing urban-rural disparities are essential to strengthen UI management at the primary care level.
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.