SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Urinary Incontinence in Women Athletes: Umbrella Review and Meta-analysis of Sport-Related Factors.
Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07757633 (Pelvic Floor Muscle Training and Neuromuscular Performance in Women's Rugby), 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.
Pelvic Floor Muscle Training and Neuromuscular Performance in Women's Rugby
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
Abstract
backgroundUrinary incontinence is frequently reported in women athletes, yet prevalence estimates vary widely and are commonly interpreted using broad sport classifications that may not capture pelvic floor loading.
objectiveWe aimed to synthesise evidence on urinary incontinence prevalence in adult women athletes and examine whether commonly used sport classifications or reported training exposure explain between-cohort variability.
methodsFive databases were searched (January 2010-September 2025) for systematic reviews reporting urinary incontinence prevalence in women athletes to conduct an umbrella review. Eligible primary observational studies were identified from included reviews and forward citation tracking to conduct a de novo random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression restricted to adult women athletes (aged 18-45 years).
resultsFourteen systematic reviews were included, most rated as low or critically low confidence. Thirty-two primary studies (120 cohorts; n = 4649) were meta-analysed, all rated as high or moderate quality. Urinary incontinence prevalence showed substantial between-cohort heterogeneity. In meta-regression analyses, prevalence did not differ significantly across sport discipline, impact category, or sport modality. Weekly training volume was the most consistently reported exposure metric and showed a positive association with urinary incontinence odds (6% per additional hour/week; p = 0.011), within the constraints of limited intensity and pelvic floor-specific exposure data, with no evidence of effect modification by impact category or competitive level. Competitive level showed a non-robust directional trend toward higher prevalence among professionals (p = 0.08).
conclusionsCommonly used sport-label classifications showed limited explanatory value for urinary incontinence prevalence in women athletes when applied as stand-alone proxies for exposure, and may misdirect screening and prevention strategies. Within the current heterogeneous and cross-sectional evidence base, cumulative training exposure emerged as the most consistently reported correlate of urinary incontinence prevalence. These findings highlight the need for prospective studies using standardised training metrics with pelvic floor-specific measures to better characterise a multi-dimensional pelvic floor exposure.
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.