The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of 2 Transvaginal Surgical Approaches and Perioperative Behavioral Therapy for Apical Vaginal Prolapse: The OPTIMAL Randomized Trial
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: More than 300,000 surgeries are performed annually in the United States for pelvic organ prolapse. Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and uterosacral ligament suspension (ULS) are commonly performed transvaginal surgeries to correct apical prolapse. Little is known about their comparative efficacy and safety, and it is unknown whether perioperative behavioral therapy with pelvic floor muscle training (BPMT) improves outcomes of prolapse surgery. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between (1) SSLF and ULS and (2) perioperative BPMT and usual care in women undergoing surgery for vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized trial of 374 women undergoing surgery to treat both apical vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence was conducted between 2008 and 2013 at 9 US medical centers. Two-year follow-up rate was 84.5%. INTERVENTIONS: The surgical intervention was transvaginal surgery including midurethral sling with randomization to SSLF (n = 186) or ULS (n = 188); the behavioral intervention was randomization to receive perioperative BPMT (n = 186) or usual care (n = 188). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome for the surgical intervention (surgical success) was defined as (1) no apical descent greater than one-third into vaginal canal or anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond the hymen (anatomic success), (2) no bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms, and (3) no re-treatment for prolapse at 2 years. For the behavioral intervention, primary outcome at 6 months was urinary symptom scores (Urinary Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse), and primary outcomes at 2 years were prolapse symptom scores (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory; range 0-300, higher scores worse) and anatomic success. RESULTS: At 2 years, surgical group was not significantly associated with surgical success rates (ULS, 59.2% [93/157] vs SSLF, 60.5% [92/152]; unadjusted difference, -1.3%; 95% CI, -12.2% to 9.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.5) or serious adverse event rates (ULS, 16.5% [31/188] vs SSLF, 16.7% [31/186]; unadjusted difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -7.7% to 7.4%; adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.6). Perioperative BPMT was not associated with greater improvements in urinary scores at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference, -6.7; 95% CI, -19.7 to 6.2), prolapse scores at 24 months (adjusted treatment difference, -8.0; 95% CI, -22.1 to 6.1), or anatomic success at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Two years after vaginal surgery for prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, neither ULS nor SSLF was significantly superior to the other for anatomic, functional, or adverse event outcomes. Perioperative BPMT did not improve urinary symptoms at 6 months or prolapse outcomes at 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00597935.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“The lack of individualized progression and reporting of adherence might be a reason for the limited benefit of PFMT on the postoperative PFM function found in those studies.14,38,39”
From Postoperative Physiotherapy in Women Undergoing Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This differs from the findings of Frawley and colleagues, Barber and colleagues, and Duarte and colleagues, 14,39,40 who did not find improvement in PFM strength or EMG measures.”
From Postoperative Physiotherapy in Women Undergoing Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The findings of this study regarding the effect on QOL and symptoms are similar to those of most previous studies.13,14,38 -40”
From Postoperative Physiotherapy in Women Undergoing Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Like Barber and colleagues 39 and the current study, they included individualized PFM exercises instead of a standard protocol.”
From Postoperative Physiotherapy in Women Undergoing Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A single trial (Barber 2014) reported no difference in rate of transfusion between the uterosacral and sacrospinous colpopexy (RR 1.67 95% CI 0.50 to 5.60; n=30; Analysis 6.14).”
From Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse (2023) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Three trials were included: Barber 2014 and Martins 2020 compared uterosacral and sacrospinous colpopexy, and Natale 2010 compared uterosacral colpopexy and levator myorrhaphy with no differences identified between the groups in anatomical, functional and perioperative outcomes.”
From Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse (2023) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, there was no effect of PFMT in this study on either PFM strength or POP.”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, if there was no short-term effect of a PFMT program [49, 50, 62, 67, 71, 75], then long-term effects are unlikely.”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, high-quality randomised controlled trial (RCT) data suggest that this approach might be associated with a high surgical failure rate of up to 35% at 2 years [5].”
From Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy and apical suspension: 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2022) · cites this paper as [5]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Two trials exclusively assessed women undergoing primary prolapse repairs only (Barber 2014; Duarte 2020), with no other trials excluding previous prolapse surgeries.”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there may be no clinically relevant difference in POPQ assessment for Point C with or without pelvic floor training (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.74; 1 study, 307 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.4).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there may be no clinically relevant difference in repeat surgery for prolapse with or without pelvic floor training (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.23 to 3.26; P = 0.82; 1 study, 316 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.2).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there may be no clinically relevant difference in POPQ assessment for Point Ba with or without pelvic floor training (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.74; 1 study, 308 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.4).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there may be no clinically relevant difference in POPQ assessment for Point Bp with or without pelvic floor training (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.76; 1 study, 308 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.4).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there may be no clinically relevant difference in recurrent prolapse on examination with or without pelvic floor training (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.29; P = 0.49; 1 study, 307 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.3).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on data from a single trial (Barber 2014), there was no clinically relevant difference in patient awareness of prolapse with or without pelvic floor training (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.87; 1 study, 305 women; low‐certainty evidence; Analysis 1.1).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This contradicts the results of studies with a high number of postoperative follow-up sessions, 39,40 which have demonstrated a limited benefit of PFMT on strength measures.”
From Postoperative Physiotherapy in Women Undergoing Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These have been shown to be essentially equivalent in efficacy.9”
From Characteristics Associated With Surgical Failure After Native Tissue Apical Prolapse Repair (2024) · cites this paper as [9]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, there was no effect of the original training program in this study [62], and a long-term effect may therefore not be expected.”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Two trials reported on objective failure at any site (Barber 2014; Mueller 2017).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Eleven full publications or meeting abstracts which were published from 2005 until 2021 [62–72] were included.”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“only Barber et al. (2014) [62] reported long-term adherence to PFMT”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“They found that 93.4% reported to adhere to PFMT 6 months after the intervention and 81.4% at 2 years.”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [62]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“given comparable outcomes), 69”
From Hysterectomy versus uterine preservation for pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a prospective cohort study (2025) · cites this paper as [69]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“At two years, BPMT did not significantly improve urinary or prolapse symptom scores (UDI, POPDI) or anatomical outcomes.”
From Pelvic Floor Muscle Training Following Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Recommendation from Scientific Literature (2026) · cites this paper as [33]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Concomitant stress incontinence was an inclusion criterion in Barber 2014, and an exclusion criterion in Bray 2017.”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The length of follow‐up varied, from a few days of postoperative follow‐up in Chan 2014 and Henn 2016, to 24 months in Barber 2014.”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“POP surgery with or without pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT): seven trials with a total of 1032 women (Barber 2014; Brandt 2019; Duarte 2020; Mathew 2021; McClurg 2014; Nyhus 2020; Pauls 2013).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Seven trials reported on PROMs (Antosh 2013; Arunachalam 2019; Barber 2014; Duarte 2020; Mueller 2017; Pauls 2013; Russo 2020).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“One trial reported on repeat surgery for recurrent prolapse (Barber 2014).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Three trials reported on awareness of prolapse (Ballard 2014; Barber 2014; Mueller 2017).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Two trials reported on POPQ assessments (Barber 2014; Mueller 2017).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Barber 2014
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the OPTIMAL trial was also unable to demonstrate a clear superiority of one apical suspension technique over the other in terms of either success rates or complication rates [32”
From The uterus debate in vaginal native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse: Hysteropexy versus hysterectomy – A systematic review and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“This mismatch, and that between expectations and goals, may be influenced by inadequate counselling, poor ‘customer’ care, consideration of the impact of prolapse on body image, sexual function, and perhaps other indirect effects; those on a woman's anxiety, depression, and cognitive state [25, 26, 27, 28, 29].”
From How Can We Improve the Assessment and Indifferent Outcomes From Pelvic Organ Prolapse Management From Conservative and Surgical Therapies? ICI‐RS 2025 (2026) · cites this paper as [26]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“The incidence of serious adverse events from other trials range from 11.6-16.7% [20, 21].”
From Outpatient visits versus telephone interviews for postoperative care: a randomized controlled trial (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“Moreover, the failure rate of unilateral sacrospinous fixation is high (40–70%) [ 29 , 30 ].”
From Recurrent pelvic organ prolapse after hysterectomy; a 10-year national follow-up study (2024) · cites this paper as [29]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dindo, D., Demartines, N., & Clavien, P.-A. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae · Cited by 31,378
The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction
Bump, R. C., Mattiasson, A., Bø, K., Brubaker, L. P., DeLancey, J. O. L., Klarskov, P., Shull, B. L., & Smith, A. R. B. (1996) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70243-0 · Cited by 4,275
Self-citationEpidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence
OLSEN, A., SMITH, V, BERGSTROM, J., COLLING, J., & CLARK, A. (1997) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00058-6 · Cited by 3,335
Burger, J. W. A., Luijendijk, R. W., Hop, W. C. J., Halm, J. A., Verdaasdonk, E. G. G., & Jeekel, J. J. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000141193.08524.e7 · Cited by 1,615
Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baeßler, K., & Glazener, C. M. A. (2010) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004014.pub4 · Cited by 1,115
Dumoulin, C. L., Hay-Smith, J. E., & Habée-Séguin, G. M. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005654.pub3 · Cited by 1,105
Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baessler, K., & Schmid, C. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004014.pub5 · Cited by 784
Retropubic versus Transobturator Midurethral Slings for Stress Incontinence
Richter, H. E., Albo, M., Zyczynski, H. M., Kenton, K. S., Norton, P., Sirls, L. T., II, Kraus, S. R., Chai, T. C., Lemack, G. E., Dandreo, K. J., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0912658 · Cited by 687
Self-citationBehavioral vs Drug Treatment for Urge Urinary Incontinence in Older Women
Burgio, K. L., Locher, J. L., Goode, P. S., Hardin, J. M., McDowell, B. J., Dombrowski, M., & Candib, D. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.23.1995 · Cited by 629
Self-citationBarber, M. D., Kuchibhatla, M. N., Pieper, C. F., & Bump, R. C. (2001) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1067/mob.2001.118659 · Cited by 617
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baeßler, K., Christmann‐Schmid, C., Haya, N., & Brown, J. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012376 · Cited by 424
Pelvic floor physical therapy in the treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction in women
Wallace, S. L., Miller, L., & Mishra, K. (2019) · Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/gco.0000000000000584 · Cited by 284
Jelovsek, J. E., Barber, M. D., Brubaker, L., Norton, P., Gantz, M., Richter, H. E., Weidner, A., Menefee, S., Schaffer, J., Pugh, N., et al. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.2827 · Cited by 256
Self-citationBarber, M. D. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i3853 · Cited by 234
Self-citationDetollenaere, R. J., den Boon, J., Stekelenburg, J., IntHout, J., Vierhout, M. E., Kluivers, K. B., & van Eijndhoven, H. W. F. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h3717 · Cited by 194
Mesh Sacrocolpopexy Compared With Native Tissue Vaginal Repair
Siddiqui, N. Y., Grimes, C. L., Casiano, E. R., Abed, H. T., Jeppson, P. C., Olivera, C. K., Sanses, T. V. D., Steinberg, A. C., South, M. M. T., Balk, E. M., et al. (2014) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000570 · Cited by 191
Pelvic Organ Prolapse: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 214
(2019) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003519 · Cited by 187
Li, C., Gong, Y., & Wang, B. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2846-y · Cited by 154
Evaluation and Management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Raju, R., & Linder, B. J. (2021) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.09.005 · Cited by 154
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Urogynecologic Society INTERIM UPDATE: This Practice Bulletin is updated as highlighted to reflect the US Food and Drug Administration order to stop the sale of transvaginal synthetic mesh products for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse. (2019) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000794 · Cited by 154
Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse
Maher, C., Yeung, E., Haya, N., Christmann-Schmid, C., Mowat, A., Chen, Z., & Baessler, K. (2023) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012376.pub2 · Cited by 114
Good, M. M., & Solomon, E. R. (2019) · Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2019.04.010 · Cited by 107
Nager, C. W., Visco, A. G., Richter, H. E., Rardin, C. R., Rogers, R. G., Harvie, H. S., Zyczynski, H. M., Paraiso, M. F. R., Mazloomdoost, D., Grey, S., et al. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.12812 · Cited by 103
Self-citationGenital hiatus size is associated with and predictive of apical vaginal support loss
Lowder, J. L., Oliphant, S. S., Shepherd, J. P., Ghetti, C., & Sutkin, G. (2016) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.027 · Cited by 83
Sung, V. W., Borello‐France, D., Newman, D. K., Richter, H. E., Lukacz, E. S., Moalli, P., Weidner, A. C., Smith, A. L., Dunivan, G. C., Ridgeway, B., et al. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.12467 · Cited by 83
Self-citationBrown, B. N., Mani, D., Nolfi, A. L., Liang, R., Abramowitch, S. D., & Moalli, P. (2015) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.002 · Cited by 83
Outpatient visits versus telephone interviews for postoperative care: a randomized controlled trial
Thompson, J. C., Cichowski, S. B., Rogers, R. G., Qeadan, F., Zambrano, J., Wenzl, C., Jeppson, P. C., Dunivan, G. C., & Komesu, Y. M. (2019) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-019-03895-z · Cited by 82
Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse
Maher, C., Baeßler, K., Barber, M. D., Cheong, C., Consten, E. C. J., Cooper, K. G., Deffieux, X., Dietz, V., Gutman, R. E., van Iersel, J. J., et al. (2018) · Climacteric · doi:10.1080/13697137.2018.1551348 · Cited by 74
Self-citationQuality of life and sexual function 2 years after vaginal surgery for prolapse.
Lukacz, E. S., Warren, L. K., Richter, H. E., Brubaker, L., Barber, M. D., Norton, P., Weidner, A. C., Nguyen, J. N., & Gantz, M. G. (2016) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001442 · Cited by 72
Self-citationGuideline No. 413: Surgical Management of Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Women
Geoffrion, R., & Larouche, M. (2021) · Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada · doi:10.1016/j.jogc.2021.02.001 · Cited by 76
Kelly, M., Macdougall, K., Olabisi, O., & McGuire, N. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3029-1 · Cited by 70
Unger, C. A., Walters, M. D., Ridgeway, B., Jelovsek, J. E., Barber, M. D., & Paraiso, M. F. R. (2014) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2014.11.034 · Cited by 69
Self-citationPerioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery
Haya, N., Feiner, B., Baessler, K., Christmann-Schmid, C., & Maher, C. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013105 · Cited by 67
Gaining the patient perspective on pelvic floor disorders’ surgical adverse events
Dunivan, G. C., Sussman, A. L., Jelovsek, J. E., Sung, V. W., Andy, U. U., Ballard, A. C., Jakus-Waldman, S. M., Amundsen, C. L., Chermansky, C., Bann, C., et al. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.10.033 · Cited by 66
Self-citationInferior gluteal and other nerves associated with sacrospinous ligament: a cadaver study
Rodriguez, M. E. F., Hare, A. M., Chin, K., Phelan, J. N., Ripperda, C. M., & Corton, M. M. (2016) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.06.025 · Cited by 65
Bø, K., Anglès-Acedo, S., Batra, A., Brækken, I. H., Chan, Y. L., Jorge, C. H., Kruger, J., Yadav, M., & Dumoulin, C. (2022) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-022-05324-0 · Cited by 64
“Furthermore, there was no effect of the original training program in this study [62], and a long-term effect may therefore not be expected.”
BackgroundFrawley, H., Dean, S. G., Slade, S. C., & Hay-Smith, J. E. (2017) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzx006 · Cited by 61
Surgical Alteration of Genital Hiatus Size and Anatomic Failure After Vaginal Vault Suspension
Vaughan, M. H., Siddiqui, N. Y., Newcomb, L. K., Weidner, A. C., Kawasaki, A., Visco, A. G., & Bradley, M. S. (2018) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002593 · Cited by 59
Self-citationA randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy
Tan-Kim, J., Nager, C. W., Grimes, C. L., Luber, K. M., Lukacz, E. S., Brown, H. W., Ferrante, K. L., Dyer, K. Y., Kirby, A. C., & Menefee, S. A. (2014) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-014-2566-8 · Cited by 58
Self-citationBaeßler, K., Aigmüller, T., Albrich, S. B., Anthuber, C. J., Finas, D., Fink, T., Fünfgeld, C., Gabriel, B., Henscher, U., Hetzer, F. H., et al. (2016) · Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · doi:10.1055/s-0042-119648 · Cited by 58
Prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse
Giarenis, I., & Robinson, D. (2014) · F1000Prime Reports · doi:10.12703/p6-77 · Cited by 58
Larouche, M., Belzile, E., & Geoffrion, R. (2021) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004393 · Cited by 54
Turner, L. C., Lavelle, E. S., & Shepherd, J. P. (2015) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2897-0 · Cited by 54
van der Vaart, L. R., Vollebregt, A., Milani, A. L., Lagro-Janssen, A. L. M., Duijnhoven, R. G., Roovers, J., & van der Vaart, C. H. (2022) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2022.22385 · Cited by 49
Mesh deformation: A mechanism underlying polypropylene prolapse mesh complications in vivo
Knight, K. M., King, G. E., Palcsey, S. L., Suda, A., Liang, R., & Moalli, P. (2022) · Acta Biomaterialia · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2022.05.051 · Cited by 46
Management of Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Alas, A., & Anger, J. T. (2015) · Current Urology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11934-015-0498-6 · Cited by 45
Post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse
Robinson, D., Thiagamoorthy, G., & Cardozo, L. (2017) · Maturitas · doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.07.011 · Cited by 44
Aharoni, S., Matanes, E., Lauterbach, R., Mor, O., Weiner, Z., & Löwenstein, L. (2021) · European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.03.040 · Cited by 43
Manchester Procedure vs Sacrospinous Hysteropexy for Treatment of Uterine Descent
Enklaar, R. A., Schulten, S. F. M., van Eijndhoven, H. W. F., Weemhoff, M., van Leijsen, S. A. L., der Weide, M. C. J., van Bavel, J., Verkleij‐Hagoort, A. C., Adang, E., Kluivers, K. B., et al. (2023) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2023.13140 · Cited by 44
Apical Suspension Repair for Vaginal Vault Prolapse
Menefee, S. A., Richter, H. E., Myers, D. L., Moalli, P., Weidner, A. C., Harvie, H. S., Rahn, D. D., Meriwether, K. V., Paraiso, M. F. R., Whitworth, R., et al. (2024) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2024.1206 · Cited by 43
Self-citationFemale pelvic floor biomechanics
Easley, D. C., Abramowitch, S. D., & Moalli, P. (2017) · Current Opinion in Urology · doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000000380 · Cited by 41
Houlihan, S., Kim-Fine, S., Birch, C., Tang, S., & Brennand, E. A. (2018) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-018-3801-5 · Cited by 41
Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension and sacral colpopexy: results and complications
Filmar, G. A., Fisher, H. W., Aranda, E., & Lotze, P. M. (2014) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-014-2407-9 · Cited by 40
Wu, J. M., Dieter, A. A., Pate, V., & Funk, M. J. (2017) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002051 · Cited by 39
Lo, T., Pue, L. B., Hung, T., Wu, P., & Tan, Y. L. (2015) · Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · doi:10.1111/jog.12678 · Cited by 39
Bradley, M. S., Askew, A. L., Vaughan, M. H., Kawasaki, A., & Visco, A. G. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.046 · Cited by 37
Jelovsek, J. E., Chagin, K., Lukacz, E. S., Nolen, T. L., Shepherd, J. P., Barber, M. D., Sung, V., Brubaker, L., Norton, P. A., Rahn, D. D., et al. (2018) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002750 · Cited by 36
Self-citationSammarco, A. G., Nandikanti, L., Kobernik, E. K., Xie, B., Jankowski, A., Swenson, C. W., & DeLancey, J. O. L. (2017) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.07.007 · Cited by 36
Bataller, E., Ros, C., Anglès, S., Gallego, M., Espuña‐Pons, M., & Carmona, F. (2018) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-018-3702-7 · Cited by 36
Lavelle, E. S., Giugale, L. E., Winger, D. G., Wang, L., Carter-Brooks, C. M., & Shepherd, J. P. (2017) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.09.015 · Cited by 36
Buyanova, S. N., Shchukina, N. A., Zubova, E. S., Sibryaeva, V. A., & Rizhinashvili, I. D. (2017) · Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist · doi:10.17116/rosakush201717137-45 · Cited by 36
Normand, L. L., Cosson, M., Cour, F., Deffieux, X., Donon, L., Ferry, P., Fatton, B., Hermieu, J., Marret, H., Meurette, G., et al. (2017) · Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction · doi:10.1016/j.jogoh.2017.05.001 · Cited by 35
Berger, M. B., Kolenic, G. E., Fenner, D. E., Morgan, D. M., & DeLancey, J. O. L. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.033 · Cited by 35
Association between adjuvant posterior repair and success of native tissue apical suspension
Sutkin, G., Zyczynski, H. M., Sridhar, A., Jelovsek, J. E., Rardin, C. R., Mazloomdoost, D., Rahn, D. D., Nguyen, J. N., Andy, U. U., Meyer, I., et al. (2020) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.024 · Cited by 34
Self-citationPelvic organ prolapse management
Fleischer, K., & Thiagamoorthy, G. (2020) · Post Reproductive Health · doi:10.1177/2053369120937594 · Cited by 34
Li, H., You, S., Yang, X., Liu, S., & Hu, L. (2022) · Biomaterials Advances · doi:10.1016/j.msec.2022.112715 · Cited by 34
Current management of pelvic organ prolapse in aging women: EMAS clinical guide
Giannini, A., Russo, E., Cano, A., Chedraui, P. A., Goulis, D. G., Lambrinoudaki, I. V., Lopès, P., Mishra, G. D., Mueck, A. O., REES, M. C. P., et al. (2018) · Maturitas · doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2018.02.004 · Cited by 33
Mowat, A., Wong, V., Goh, J. T. W., Krause, H. G., Pelecanos, A. M., & Higgs, P. (2017) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/ajo.12720 · Cited by 32
Harvie, H. S., Honeycutt, A., Neuwahl, S. J., Barber, M. D., Richter, H. E., Visco, A. G., Sung, V. W., Shepherd, J. P., Rogers, R. G., Jakus-Waldman, S. M., et al. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.11.1094 · Cited by 32
Self-citationBarber, M. D., Brubaker, L. T., Nygaard, I., Wai, C. Y., Dyer, K. Y., Ellington, D. R., Sridhar, A., Gantz, M. G., Dickersin, K., Jiang, L., et al. (2019) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2019.06.004 · Cited by 31
Self-citationNaumann, G., Hüsch, T., Mörgeli, C., Kolterer, A., & Tunn, R. (2020) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-020-04525-9 · Cited by 30
Surgical Updates in the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Geynisman‐Tan, J., & Kenton, K. S. (2017) · Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal · doi:10.5041/rmmj.10294 · Cited by 30
Phenazopyridine for Evaluation of Ureteral Patency
Propst, K. A., Tunitsky-Bitton, E., O’Sullivan, D. M., Steinberg, A. C., & LaSala, C. A. (2016) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001472 · Cited by 29
Sexual Activity and Dyspareunia 1 Year After Surgical Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Lukacz, E. S., Sridhar, A., Chermansky, C., Rahn, D. D., Harvie, H. S., Gantz, M. G., Varner, R. E., Korbly, N. B., & Mazloomdoost, D. (2020) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003992 · Cited by 29
Self-citationTransvaginal Mesh Compared With Native Tissue Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Kahn, B. S., Varner, R. E., Murphy, M., Sand, P. K., Thomas, S. L., Lipetskaia, L., Chung, D. E., Mahdy, A. E., & Noblett, K. L. (2022) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004794 · Cited by 29
Preoperative Prolapse Stage as Predictor of Failure of Sacrocolpopexy
Aslam, M. F., Osmundsen, B., Edwards, S. R., Matthews, C. A., & Gregory, W. T. (2015) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000233 · Cited by 29
Carter-Brooks, C. M., Lowder, J. L., Du, A. L., Lavelle, E. S., Giugale, L. E., & Shepherd, J. P. (2017) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000528 · Cited by 30
Rahn, D. D., Richter, H. E., Sung, V. W., Pruszynski, J. E., & Hynan, L. S. (2023) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2023.12317 · Cited by 28
Self-citationEspiño-Albela, A., Castaño-García, C., Díaz-Mohedo, E., & Ibáñez-Vera, A. J. (2022) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm12050806 · Cited by 28
A systematic review of the surgical management of apical pelvic organ prolapse
Chan, C. Y. W., Fernandes, R. A., Yao, H. H., O’Connell, H. E., Tse, V. W., & Gani, J. (2022) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-022-05408-x · Cited by 28
Maher, C., Baeßler, K., Barber, M. D., Cheon, C., Consten, E. C. J., Cooper, K. G., Deffieux, X., Dietz, V., Gutman, R. E., van Iersel, J. J., et al. (2018) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000591 · Cited by 28
Self-citationNyhus, M. Ø., Mathew, S., Salvesen, Ø., Salvesen, K. Å., Stafne, S., & Volløyhaug, I. (2020) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.22007 · Cited by 27
Duarte, T. B., Bø, K., Brito, L. G. O., Bueno, S. M., Barcelos, T. M., Bonacin, M. A., & Ferreira, C. H. (2020) · Journal of Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.jphys.2019.11.013 · Cited by 27
Nager, C. W., Zyczynski, H., Rogers, R. G., Barber, M. D., Richter, H. E., Visco, A. G., Rardin, C. R., Harvie, H., Wallace, D., & Meikle, S. F. (2016) · Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000270 · Cited by 27
Self-citationLourenço, T. R. D. M., Pergialiotis, V., Durnea, C. M., Elfituri, A., Haddad, J. M., Betschart, C., Falconi, G., & Doumouchtsis, S. K. (2019) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1002/ijgo.12766 · Cited by 27
Dubinskaya, A., Hernandez-Aranda, D., Wakefield, D. B., & Shepherd, J. P. (2019) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-019-04017-5 · Cited by 27
Ureteral Compromise in Laparoscopic Versus Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension
Barbier, H. M., Smith, M., Eto, C. U., Welgoss, J. A., Pechmann, W. V., Horbach, N. S., & Gruber, D. D. (2015) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000202 · Cited by 27
Izett-Kay, M. L., Rahmanou, P., Cartwright, R. J., Price, N., & Jackson, S. R. (2022) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04932-6 · Cited by 26
Siff, L. N., Unger, C. A., Jelovsek, J. E., Paraiso, M. F. R., Ridgeway, B., & Barber, M. D. (2016) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.02.006 · Cited by 26
Self-citationNormand, L. L., Cosson, M., Cour, F., Deffieux, X., Donon, L., Ferry, P., Fatton, B., Hermieu, J., Marret, H., Meurette, G., et al. (2016) · Journal de gynécologie, obstétrique et biologie de la reproduction. Supplément/Journal de gynécologie obstétrique et biologie de la reproduction · doi:10.1016/j.jgyn.2016.09.020 · Cited by 26
The incidence of transfusion and associated risk factors in pelvic reconstructive surgery
Pandya, L. K., Lynch, C. D.-J., Hundley, A. F., Nekkanti, S., & Hudson, C. O. (2017) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.07.005 · Cited by 26
Towards rebuilding vaginal support utilizing an extracellular matrix bioscaffold
Liang, R., Knight, K. M., Easley, D. C., Palcsey, S. L., Abramowitch, S. D., & Moalli, P. (2017) · Acta Biomaterialia · doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2017.05.015 · Cited by 25
Mechanical Analysis of the Uterosacral Ligament: Swine vs. Human
Baah-Dwomoh, A., Alperin, M., Cook, M. S., & Vita, R. D. (2018) · Annals of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10439-018-2103-x · Cited by 25
Smith, B. C., Crisp, C. C., Kleeman, S. D., Yook, E., & Pauls, R. N. (2019) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000704 · Cited by 25
Roadmap on biomaterials for women’s health
Fogg, K. C., Tseng, N.-H., Peyton, S. R., Holeman, W. P., McLoughlin, S. T., Fisher, J. P., Sutton, A., Shikanov, A., Gnecco, J. S., Knight, K. M., et al. (2022) · Journal of Physics Materials · doi:10.1088/2515-7639/ac90ee · Cited by 24
Native tissue repair for central compartment prolapse: a narrative review
Paz‐Levy, D., Yohay, D., Neymeyer, J., Hizkiyahu, R., & Weintraub, A. Y. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3032-6 · Cited by 24
Siff, L. N., Barber, M. D., Zyczynski, H. M., Rardin, C. R., Jakus-Waldman, S., Rahn, D. D., Smith, A. L., Mazloomdoost, D., Sridhar, A., Gantz, M. G., et al. (2020) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004043 · Cited by 23
Self-citationMeasuring Pelvic Organ Prolapse: An Evolution
Barber, M. D. (2024) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-024-05798-0 · Cited by 23
Self-citationDefinitions of apical vaginal support loss: a systematic review
Meister, M. R. L., Sutcliffe, S., & Lowder, J. L. (2017) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.09.078 · Cited by 23
Physiotherapy assessment for female urinary incontinence
Berghmans, B. C. M., Seleme, M., & Bernards, A. T. M. (2020) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-020-04251-2 · Cited by 23
Löwenstein, L., Matanes, E., Lauterbach, R., Mor, O., Burke, Y. Z., Weiner, Z., & Baekelandt, J. F. (2020) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000875 · Cited by 23
Defining mechanisms of recurrence following apical prolapse repair based on imaging criteria
Bowen, S. T., Moalli, P., Abramowitch, S. D., Lockhart, M. E., Weidner, A. C., Ferrando, C. A., Nager, C. W., Richter, H. E., Rardin, C. R., Komesu, Y. M., et al. (2021) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.041 · Cited by 24
Self-citationBradley, M. S., Bickhaus, J. A., Amundsen, C. L., Newcomb, L. K., Truong, T., Weidner, A. C., & Siddiqui, N. Y. (2017) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000451 · Cited by 23
Self-citationAmerican Urogynecologic Society Prolapse Consensus Conference Summary Report
Siddiqui, N. Y., Gregory, W. T., Handa, V. L., DeLancey, J. O. L., Richter, H. E., Moalli, P., Barber, M. D., Pulliam, S. J., Visco, A. G., Alperin, M., et al. (2018) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000533 · Cited by 23
Self-citationFerrando, C. A., & Walters, M. D. (2018) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.03.033 · Cited by 23
for the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network, Sung, V. W., Borello‐France, D., Dunivan, G. C., Gantz, M. G., Lukacz, E. S., Moalli, P., Newman, D. K., Richter, H. E., Ridgeway, B., et al. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3031-7 · Cited by 23
Self-citationSurgical treatments for vaginal apical prolapse
Kong, M. K., & Bai, S. W. (2016) · Obstetrics & Gynecology Science · doi:10.5468/ogs.2016.59.4.253 · Cited by 22
Lasak, A. M., Jean‐Michel, M., Le, P. U., Durgam, R. G., & Harroche, J. (2018) · PM&R · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.03.023 · Cited by 22
Serati, M., Laganà, A. S., Casarin, J., Gisone, B. E., Cantaluppi, S., & Ghezzi, F. (2019) · Updates in Surgery · doi:10.1007/s13304-019-00690-9 · Cited by 22
Yadav, G. S., Gaddam, N. G., & Rahn, D. D. (2020) · Urogynecology · doi:10.1097/spv.0000000000000999 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Barber, M. D., Brubaker, L., Burgio, K. L., Richter, H. E., Nygaard, I., Weidner, A. C., Menefee, S. A., Lukacz, E. S., Norton, P., Schaffer, J., Nguyen, J. N., Borello-France, D., Goode, P. S., Jakus-Waldman, S., Spino, C., Warren, L. K., Gantz, M. G., & Meikle, S. F.
- Affiliations
- Cleveland Clinic (US)
- Loyola University Chicago (US)
- University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
- University of Utah (US)
- Duke University (US)
- Kaiser Permanente (US)
- UC San Diego Health System (US)
- The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
- Department of Physical Therapy, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
- University of Michigan (US)
- RTI International (US)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2014-03-12
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1023
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- PMC
- PMC4083455
- OpenAlex
- W2151316027
- Semantic Scholar
- c7221d0dc04ee3d48408809eb8d70e3f407683d0
- Cited by
- 428
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 13
- FWCI
- 28.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Pfizer
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Boston Scientific Corporation
- Astellas Pharma
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Office of Research on Women's Health
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U10HD041261, U10HD054136, UG1HD041261, HD054214, U10HD054214, U01HD041249, U10HD054215, UG1HD054215, HD054241, U10HD069006, U01HD069031, HD041267, U10HD041267, U10HD054241, HD069031, HD041261, U10HD041250, UG1HD054214, UG1HD054241, UG1HD041267)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Keywords
- apical vaginal prolapse, sacrospinous ligament fixation, uterosacral ligament suspension, pelvic floor muscle training, stress urinary incontinence, midurethral sling, surgical success, pelvic organ prolapse, women's health, surgical outcomes comparison, retreatment
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Behavior Therapy, Exercise Therapy, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Urinary Incontinence, Stress, Urination, Uterine Prolapse, Treatment Outcome, Pelvic Floor, Suburethral Slings
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
