The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 39 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: Pelvic floor disorders (urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, and pelvic organ prolapse) affect many women. No national prevalence estimates derived from the same population-based sample exists for multiple pelvic floor disorders in women in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To provide national prevalence estimates of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cross-sectional analysis of 1961 nonpregnant women (>or=20 years) who participated in the 2005-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative survey of the US noninstitutionalized population. Women were interviewed in their homes and then underwent standardized physical examinations in a mobile examination center. Urinary incontinence (score of >or=3 on a validated incontinence severity index, constituting moderate to severe leakage), fecal incontinence (at least monthly leakage of solid, liquid, or mucous stool), and pelvic organ prolapse (seeing/feeling a bulge in or outside the vagina) symptoms were assessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Weighted prevalence estimates of urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, and pelvic organ prolapse symptoms. RESULTS: The weighted prevalence of at least 1 pelvic floor disorder was 23.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.2%-26.2%), with 15.7% of women (95% CI, 13.2%-18.2%) experiencing urinary incontinence, 9.0% of women (95% CI, 7.3%-10.7%) experiencing fecal incontinence, and 2.9% of women (95% CI, 2.1%-3.7%) experiencing pelvic organ prolapse. The proportion of women reporting at least 1 disorder increased incrementally with age, ranging from 9.7% (95% CI, 7.8%-11.7%) in women between ages 20 and 39 years to 49.7% (95% CI, 40.3%-59.1%) in those aged 80 years or older (P < .001), and parity (12.8% [95% CI, 9.0%-16.6%], 18.4% [95% CI, 12.9%-23.9%], 24.6% [95% CI, 19.5%-29.8%], and 32.4% [95% CI, 27.8%-37.1%] for 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more deliveries, respectively; P < .001). Overweight and obese women were more likely to report at least 1 pelvic floor disorder than normal weight women (26.3% [95% CI, 21.7%-30.9%], 30.4% [95% CI, 25.8%-35.0%], and 15.1% [95% CI, 11.6%-18.7%], respectively; P < .001). We detected no differences in prevalence by racial/ethnic group. CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor disorders affect a substantial proportion of women and increase with age.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
18 Not checked yet · 11 Own result · 8 Own method · 7 Own interpretation · 2 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“9.0% of women (95% CI, 7.3%–10.7%) experiencing fecal incontinence”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“9.0% (95% CI, 7.3%–10.7%) experienced fecal incontinence”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“parity (12.8% [95% CI, 9.0%–16.6%], 18.4% [95% CI, 12.9%–23.9%], 24.6% [95% CI, 19.5%–29.8%], and 32.4% [95% CI, 27.8%–37.1%] for 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more deliveries, respectively; P<.001)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“parity (12.8% [95% CI, 9.0%–16.6%] for nulliparous women vs 18.4% [95% CI, 12.9%–23.9%], 24.6% [95% CI, 19.5%–29.8%], and 32.4% [95% CI, 27.8%–37.1%] for those women with 1, 2, and ≥3 deliveries, respectively; P<.001)”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although Hispanic women were less likely than white or black women to report fecal incontinence in our study, other studies found no such difference in community-dwelling adults.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We detected no differences in prevalence by racial/ethnic group.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Race/ethnicity and education were not significantly associated with having at least 1 pelvic floor disorder (P = .26 and P = .06, respectively).”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overweight and obese women were more likely to report at least 1 pelvic floor disorder than normal weight women (26.3% [95% CI, 21.7%–30.9%], 30.4% [95% CI, 25.8%–35.0%], and 15.1% [95% CI, 11.6%–18.7%], respectively; P<.001)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“body mass index (15.1% [95% CI, 11.6%–18.7%] for underweight/normal weight, 26.3% [95% CI, 21.7%–30.9%] for overweight, and 30.4% [95% CI, 25.8%–35.0%] for obese women; P<.001)”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Race/ethnicity and education were not significantly associated with having at least 1 pelvic floor disorder (P = .26 and P = .06, respectively).”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“2.9% of women (95% CI, 2.1%–3.7%) experiencing pelvic organ prolapse”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“2.9% (95% CI, 2.1%–3.7%) experienced symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proportion of women reporting at least 1 disorder increased incrementally with age, ranging from 9.7% (95% CI, 7.8%–11.7%) in women between ages 20 and 39 years to 49.7% (95% CI, 40.3%–59.1%) in those aged 80 years or older (P<.001)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“The proportion of women that reported at least 1 pelvic floor disorder increased with age (9.7% [95% CI, 7.8%–11.7%] in women aged 20 to 39 years, 26.5% [95% CI, 23.0%–29.9%] in women aged 40 to 59 years, 36.8% [95% CI, 32.0%–41.6%] in women aged 60 to 79 years, and 49.7% [95% CI, 40.3%–59.1%] in women aged 80 years or older; P <.001).”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“family poverty income ratio (20.8% [95% CI, 18.1%–23.5%] if >2-fold above the poverty threshold vs 28.8% [95% CI, 21.8%–35.7%] if below the poverty threshold and 29.7% [95% CI, 25.1%–34.3%] if 1–2 × above the poverty threshold; P=.002)”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The finding that both urinary and fecal incontinence increase with age is consistent with the epidemiological literature.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [28]
- Not checked yetcites [29]
- Not checked yetcites [30]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As with urinary incontinence, differences in prevalence estimates are explained in part by differences in case definition, with some studies including involuntary loss of flatus in the definition and other studies limiting the definition to loss of stool or mucus.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These data represent the first nationwide, population-based estimates of the 3 primary pelvic floor disorders in women in the United States derived from a single source.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Before this study, no national prevalence estimates for multiple pelvic floor disorders in US women had been derived from a single population-based sample.
In the paper
“Prolapse estimates using this question underreport the true prevalence of prolapse on examination.”
- Also stated in: § COMMENT · plain
“symptom-based diagnosis underestimates the true prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse diagnosed by physical examination.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Study Population
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § COMMENT · plain
In the paper
“By 2030, more than one-fifth of women will be 65 years or older.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A major impediment to population-based studies is the requirement of an examination to assess vaginal support.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The few studies available show that apical, anterior, and posterior vaginal wall prolapse also increases with advancing age.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31]
- Not checked yetcites [32]
- Not checked yetcites [33]
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the Oxford Family Planning Study,33 women with 2 deliveries were substantially more likely to have surgery for prolapse compared with women with no delivery.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The symptom most strongly correlated with the presence of advanced pelvic organ prolapse is “seeing” or “feeling” a vaginal bulge.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22]
- Not checked yetcites [23]
- Not checked yetcites [24]
- Not checked yetcites [25]
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the fact that more than 1 in 8 nulliparous women in the 2005–2006 NHANES reported at least 1 symptomatic pelvic floor disorder demonstrates the multifactorial nature of these conditions.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The association between fecal incontinence and parity is inconsistent.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [35]
- Not checked yetcites [36]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
- Probably not a substantial claim. 18
- It may state two separate claims as one. 11
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“15.7% of women (95% CI, 13.2%–18.2%) experiencing urinary incontinence”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“15.7% (95% CI, 13.2%–18.2%) experienced urinary incontinence”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The weighted prevalence of at least 1 pelvic floor disorder was 23.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.2%–26.2%)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Overall, 23.7% (95% CI, 21.2%–26.2%) of women had symptoms of at least 1 pelvic floor disorder.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > Abstract > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“published estimates of the prevalence of fecal incontinence in the community range widely, from 2.2%14 up to 24%.15–18”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14]
- Not checked yetcites [15]
- Not checked yetcites [16]
- Not checked yetcites [17]
- Not checked yetcites [18]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“because women typically do not seek care for prolapse until symptoms develop and physicians generally do not offer surgical treatment until symptoms become bothersome, symptom-based prevalence estimates likely represent the best estimate of disease burden on the population.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After eliminating 292 women who were currently pregnant, our final analytic data set comprised 1961 women.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Study Population
plainn = 1,961- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“although the sample sizes were adequate to describe prevalence rates by demographic characteristics, they were too small to provide meaningful estimates of adjusted risk factors, including the effect of delivery type on pelvic floor disorders.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Weighted prevalence estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using SAS version 9.1 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North Carolina), incorporating the design effect, appropriate sample weights, stratification, and clustering of the complex NHANES sample design.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each NHANES provides national estimates of health status of adults in the United States at the time of the survey by selecting a nationally representative sample of the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population, by using a complex, stratified, multistage, probability cluster design.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > The 2005–2006 NHANES Program
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The National Centers for Health Statistics Ethics Review Board approved the protocol, and all participants provided written informed consent.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > The 2005–2006 NHANES Program
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Estimates with relative standard errors of more than 30% were considered statistically unreliable and are identified as such (Table).”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The specificity of vaginal bulge symptoms for predicting prolapse beyond the hymen is high in low-prevalence populations (99%–100%); however, the sensitivity is low (16%–35%), because some women with even advanced prolapse deny symptoms.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7]
- Not checked yetcites [25]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We defined fecal incontinence as at least monthly leakage of solid, liquid, or mucous stool, determined by responses on the validated fecal incontinence severity index, which applies a type × frequency matrix to obtain the patient’s perception of symptom severity.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Study Population
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4]
- Not checked yetcites [5]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“We defined symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse as a positive response to the question, “Do you experience bulging or something falling out you can see or feel in the vaginal area?”, which was derived from the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Study Population
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the population of older women increases, the national burden related to pelvic floor disorders in terms of health care costs, lost productivity, and decreased quality of life will be substantial.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our prevalence estimates are likely underestimates for several reasons: (1) they do not reflect symptoms of women who have undergone successful treatment for pelvic floor disorders; (2) we used conservative definitions; and (3) symptom-based diagnosis underestimates the true prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse diagnosed by physical examination.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 2005–2006 NHANES oversampled persons aged 60 years or older, and black, Mexican American, and low-income white individuals to provide more reliable estimates for these groups.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > The 2005–2006 NHANES Program
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To define urinary incontinence, we used the validated 2-item incontinence severity index, which correlates well with incontinence volume based on pad weights and incontinence frequency obtained on bladder diaries.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > METHODS > Study Population
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
- Not checked yetcites [3]
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Other studies, including data from NHANES in earlier waves,9–13 concluded that between 25% and 75% of women have urinary incontinence, depending on how the condition is defined.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9]
- Not checked yetcites [10]
- Not checked yetcites [11]
- Not checked yetcites [12]
- Not checked yetcites [13]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a cross-sectional study of Norwegian women, compared with women with no deliveries,34 the effect of 2 or more deliveries on urinary incontinence was greatest in younger women aged 20 to 34 years (relative risk [RR], 2.8; 95% CI, 2.3–3.3), decreased among women aged 35 to 64 years (RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6–2.3), and then, consistent with other literature, was not associated with urinary incontinence”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although national hospital discharge statistics show that black women have lower rates of prolapse surgery than white women,41 this difference cannot be attributed to just race.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many factors, including access to care, contribute to the decision to undergo surgery, and therefore to surgical prevalence rates.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Population-based epidemiological studies of pelvic organ prolapse are rare, despite the fact that it is a common indication for gynecologic surgery in older women.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because we have no information about treatment for pelvic floor disorders, we cannot comment on whether treatment varies by race/ethnicity in our sample.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is no clear consensus about what level of prolapse represents a variation of normal uterovaginal support and what represents disease, although there is growing consensus that prolapse beyond the hymen is more likely to be clinically significant.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22]
- Not checked yetcites [25]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Up to 75% of women presenting for routine gynecological care demonstrate some prolapse, and 3% to 6% have descent beyond the hymen.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [26]
- Not checked yetcites [27]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A recent analysis using earlier NHANES data (2001–2004) found a higher prevalence of stress urinary incontinence in white and Mexican American women than black women, but no differences in other incontinence subtypes.”
§ Prevalence of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in US Women > COMMENT
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [41]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Before this study, no national prevalence estimates for multiple pelvic floor disorders in US women had been derived from a single population-based sample.
“No national prevalence estimates derived from the same population-based sample exists for multiple pelvic floor disorders in women in the United States.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The national burden of pelvic floor disorders in US women was unknown because no single national population-based survey had assessed the prevalence of the three major disorders.
“because no single national population-based survey has assessed the prevalence of the 3 major pelvic floor disorders in US women, the national burden related to these diseases remains unknown.”
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?
In the citing paper
“US prevalence estimates indicating that over one-third of parous women experience at least one PFD symptom by midlife”
From Individualized Prediction of Recurrence Following Uterine-Preserving Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Using Internally Validated Machine Learning Models (2026) · cites this paper as [2]
Citations
Cites
Epidemiology 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 · cited 1×
“A regional study in the United States found that almost 10% of women have surgery for urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, or both during their lifetime, and 30% of those women have 2 or more surgical procedures.(1) However, because no single national population-based survey has assessed the prevalence of the…”
A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence:
Hannestad, Y. S., Rørtveit, G., Sandvik, H., & Hunskaar, S. (2000) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00232-8 · Cited by 1,325
Pelvic organ prolapse in the women's health initiative: Gravity and gravidity
Hendrix, S. L., Clark, A., Nygaard, I., Aragaki, A. K., Barnabei, V. M., & McTiernan, A. (2002) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1067/mob.2002.123819 · Cited by 1,273
Self-citationFecal incontinence quality of life scale
Rockwood, T. H., Church, J. M., Fleshman, J. W., Kane, R. L., Mavrantonis, C., Thorson, A. G., Wexner, S. D., Bliss, D. Z., & Lowry, A. C. (2000) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/bf02237236 · Cited by 1,234 · cited 1×
“We defined fecal incontinence as at least monthly leakage of solid, liquid, or mucous stool, determined by responses on the validated fecal incontinence severity index, which applies a type frequency matrix to obtain the patient’s perception of symptom severity.(4,5) We did not include leakage of flatus in our definit…”
MacLennan, A. H., Taylor, A. W., WILSON, D. H., & Wilson, D. (2000) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11669.x · Cited by 1,027
Patient and surgeon ranking of the severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence
Rockwood, T. H., Church, J. M., Fleshman, J. W., et al. (1999) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/bf02236199 · Cited by 809 · cited 1×
“We defined fecal incontinence as at least monthly leakage of solid, liquid, or mucous stool, determined by responses on the validated fecal incontinence severity index, which applies a type frequency matrix to obtain the patient’s perception of symptom severity.(4,5) We did not include leakage of flatus in our definit…”
Epidemiology of genital prolapse: observations from the Oxford Family Planning Association study
Mant, J., Painter, R., & Vessey, M. P. (1997) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11536.x · Cited by 780
Swift, S., Woodman, P., O'Boyle, A., Kahn, M., Valley, M., Bland, D., Wang, W., & Schaffer, J. (2005) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.10.602 · Cited by 752 · cited 1×
“Up to 75% of women presenting for routine gynecological care demonstrate some prolapse, and 3% to 6% have descent beyond the hymen.(26,27) The specificity of vaginal bulge symptoms for predicting prolapse beyond the hymen is high in low-prevalence populations (99%100%); however, the sensitivity is low (16%-35%), becau…”
Community-Based Prevalence of Anal Incontinence
Nelson, R. L. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530070057030 · Cited by 705
Samuelsson, E. C., Víctor, F.-V., Tibblin, G., & Svärdsudd, K. (1999) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70203-6 · Cited by 699 · cited 1×
“Up to 75% of women presenting for routine gynecological care demonstrate some prolapse, and 3% to 6% have descent beyond the hymen.(26,27) The specificity of vaginal bulge symptoms for predicting prolapse beyond the hymen is high in low-prevalence populations (99%100%); however, the sensitivity is low (16%-35%), becau…”
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery
Wu, J. M., Matthews, C. A., Conover, M. M., Pate, V., & Jonsson Funk, M. (2014) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000286 · Cited by 1,111
Prevalence and Trends of Symptomatic Pelvic Floor Disorders in U.S. Women
Wu, J. M., Vaughan, C. P., Goode, P. S., Redden, D. T., Burgio, K. L., Richter, H. E., & Markland, A. D. (2013) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000000057 · Cited by 947
“S population, as these disorders become more common with increasing age.(1) It is possible that these changing demographics have resulted in an increase in the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialEpidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse
Barber, M. D., & Maher, C. (2013) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2169-9 · Cited by 767
Forecasting the Prevalence of Pelvic Floor Disorders in U.S. Women
Wu, J. M., Hundley, A. F., Fulton, R. G., & Myers, E. R. (2009) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181c2ce96 · Cited by 767
Fecal Incontinence in US Adults: Epidemiology and Risk Factors
Whitehead, W. E., Borrud, L. G., Goode, P. S., Meikle, S., Mueller, E. R., Tuteja, A. K., Weidner, A. C., Weinstein, M. M., & Ye, W. (2009) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2009.04.054 · Cited by 608
“Composition and frequency of leakage was defined by subjects using the FISI(7).”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Nygaard, I.
- Affiliations
- University of Utah (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nygaard, Ingrid
- ORCID
- Nygaard, Ingrid
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2008-09-17
- Volume
- 300
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1311
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- PMC
- PMC2918416
- OpenAlex
- W1981272273
- Cited by
- 1,869
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 96 · 2025: 126 · 2024: 132 · 2023: 109 · 2022: 139 · 2021: 115 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 122 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 130 · 2016: 99 · 2015: 110 · 2014: 97 · 2013: 89 · 2012: 70
- FWCI
- 42.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (U10 HD41267, U10 HD54215, U10 HD41261, U10 HD54214)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
- Office of Research on Women's Health (U10 HD41261, U10 HD41267, U10 HD54215, U10 HD54136, U10 HD41250, U01 HD41249, U10 HD54214)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U10 HD 54215, U10 HD41267, U10 HD41261, U10 HD41269, U10HD041268, U10 HD 41268, U10HD41248, U01-HD41249, U10 HD 54214, U10HD041261, U10HD054136, U10HD054214, U10 HD 41250, U01HD041249, U10HD054215, U10HD041263, U10 HD 54136, U10HD041267, U10HD041248, U10HD041269, U10HD041250, U10 HD 41263, UG1HD041267)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Keywords
- pelvic floor dysfunction, urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, prevalence, women's health, age differences, parity, NHANES, Incontinence Severity Index, vaginal bulge, American women, population survey, health disparities, health care utilization, health care costs, quality of life
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Fecal Incontinence, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, United States, Urinary Incontinence, Uterine Prolapse, Pelvic Floor, Rectocele
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
