ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Development and validation of a predictive model for postoperative urinary retention following pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common complication following pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair surgery, significantly impacting patient recovery. Establishing an effective predictive model facilitates individualized risk assessment and postoperative management. Methods: This retrospective study included 698 patients who underwent POP surgery. The dataset was chronologically divided: patients from January 2020 to June 2024 formed the training group ( Results: Among 698 patients, 176 (25.21%) developed POUR. Following feature screening, 10 predictors were included in the models: degree of anterior pelvic prolapse (point Ba), bladder neck mobility, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), preoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk score, preoperative blood glucose (GLU), postoperative analgesia, Parity, and three types of surgical procedures. In the temporal validation cohort, the gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT) model achieved an AUC of 0.848 and showed a modest but statistically significant improvement over logistic regression (ΔAUC = 0.0397; 95% CI: 0.0165-0.0629; Holm-adjusted Conclusion: These findings suggest that the GBDT model has potential for POUR prediction in this single-center setting, but multicenter prospective validation is required before clinical implementation.
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.