ArticleAge and ageing2026
Prioritising modifiable risk factors for self-management of urinary incontinence in older men: integrating expert consensus with patient readiness.
Article in Age and ageing, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrinary incontinence (UI) affects up to one-third of men aged ≥65 years, yet evidence to guide the selection of targets for self-management interventions remains limited. Although many contributing risk factors are potentially modifiable, little is known about which are considered clinically important by experts and are also viewed by older men as feasible and worthwhile to address. This study combined expert consensus with older men's perspectives to identify candidate priorities for future self-management intervention development.
methodsWe conducted a sequential multi-methods study: an international Delphi survey with continence care experts followed by a cross-sectional survey of community-dwelling men aged ≥65 years with UI in Alberta, Canada. Experts rated the clinical importance and modifiability of evidence-informed risk factors, with consensus defined as ≥75% agreement. Older men reported willingness and perceived capability to modify expert-identified factors and completed the Geriatric Self-Efficacy Index for Urinary Incontinence (GSE-UI).
resultsExperts (n = 32 in Round 1; n = 20 in the final round) reached consensus on 19 clinically important and modifiable risk factors, spanning medical (obesity, constipation, diabetes) and behavioural (smoking, alcohol, caffeine) domains. Older men (n = 212, mean age 77.6 years) reported moderate self-efficacy (overall GSE-UI-51.0 ± 35.9), with lower confidence in socially or physically challenging situations.
conclusionIntegrating expert consensus with patient-reported willingness and perceived capability identified nocturia/nocturnal polyuria, insomnia/sleep disorder, increased body mass index (BMI)/obesity and anxiety as candidate priorities for future self-management intervention development. Increased BMI/obesity and anxiety exceeded the thresholds for prevalence, willingness and perceived capability, whereas nocturia/nocturnal polyuria and insomnia/sleep disorder exceeded the thresholds for prevalence and willingness but not perceived capability. Integrating expert consensus with older men's willingness and perceived capability provides an empirical approach to prioritising candidate intervention targets rather than relying on clinical importance alone. These findings provide a rationale for designing and evaluating future self-management interventions that better align with both clinical priorities and patient readiness.
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.