The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
International Continence Society Good Urodynamic Practices and Terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure‐flow study
Open accessAbstract
Aims: The working group initiated by the ICS Standardisation Steering Committee has updated the International Continence Society Standard “Good Urodynamic Practice” published in 2002. Methods: On the basis of the manuscript: “ICS standard to develop evidence‐based standards,” a new ICS Standard was developed in the period from December 2013 to December 2015. In July, a draft was posted on the ICS website for membership comments and discussed at the ICS 2015 annual meeting. The input of ICS membership was included in the final draft before ICS approval and subsequent peer review (for this journal). Results: This evidence‐based ICS‐GUP2016 has newly or more precisely defined more than 30 terms and provides standards for the practice, quality control, interpretation, and reporting of urodynamics; cystometry and pressure‐flow analysis. Furthermore, the working group has included recommendations for pre‐testing information and for patient information and preparation. On the basis of earlier ICS standardisations and updating according to available evidence, the practice of uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure‐flow studies are further detailed. Conclusion: ICS‐GUP2016 updates and adds on to ICS‐GUP2002 to improve urodynamic testing and reporting both for individual care and scientific purposes.
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.
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
Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3182408812 · Cited by 4,058
AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care
Brouwers, M. C., Kho, M. E., Browman, G. P., Burgers, J. S., Cluzeau, F., Feder, G., Fervers, B., Graham, I. D., Grimshaw, J., Hanna, S. E., et al. (2010) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.090449 · Cited by 3,790
Doctors' health: taking the lifecycle approach
Peters, M., Hasan, O., Puddester, D., Garelick, A., Holliday, C., Rapanakis, T., & Ryan, A. L. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.f7086 · Cited by 245
Cited by
Frawley, H., Shelly, B., Morin, M., Bernard, S., Bø, K., Digesu, G. A., Dickinson, T., Goonewardene, S., McClurg, D., Rahnama'i, M. S., et al. (2021) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.24658 · Cited by 246
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosier, P. F. W. M., Schaefer, W., Lose, G., Goldman, H. B., Guralnick, M., Eustice, S., Dickinson, T., & Hashim, H.
- Venue
- Neurourology and Urodynamics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-12-05
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1243-1260
- ISSN
- 0733-2467 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6777
- OpenAlex
- W2559758118
- Cited by
- 679
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 50.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: International Continence Society Good Urodynamic Practices and Terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure‐flow study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/nau.23124
- The paper
- Rosier, P. F. W. M., Schaefer, W., Lose, G., Goldman, H. B., Guralnick, M., Eustice, S., Dickinson, T., & Hashim, H. (2017). International Continence Society Good Urodynamic Practices and Terms 2016: Urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure‐flow study. Neurourology and Urodynamics. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23124
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.