The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patient-re ported complications and follow-up treatment after radical prostatectomy
Open accessAbstract
To estimate the probabilities of complications and follow-up treatment, a sample of Medicare patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (1988 through 1990) was surveyed by mail, telephone, and personal interview. Respondents reported their current status with respect to continence and sexual function as well as post-surgical treatments they had had to treat residual or recurrent cancer or surgical complications. Over 30 percent reported currently wearing pads or clamps to deal with wetness; over 40 percent said they drip urine when they cough or when their bladders are full; 23 percent reported daily wetting of more than a few drops. About 60 percent of patients reported having no full or partial erections since their surgery, and only 11 percent had any erections sufficient for intercourse during the month prior to the survey. Six percent had surgery after the radical prostatectomy to treat incontinence; 15 percent had treatments or used devices to help with sexual function; 20 percent report having had post-surgical treatment for urethral strictures. In addition 16 percent, 22 percent, and 28 percent reported follow-up treatment for cancer (radiation or androgen deprivation therapy) at two, three, and four years after radical prostatectomy. These estimates of complication and follow-up treatment rates are generally higher, and almost certainly more representative for older men, than estimates previously published. Patients and physicians may want to weight heavily the complications and need for follow-up treatments when considering radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.
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
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
Cited by
Quality-of-life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer
Litwin, M. S., Hays, R. D., Fink, A., Ganz, P. A., Leake, B., Leach, G. E., & Brook, R. H. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520260051032 · Cited by 1,020
Fromme, E. K., Eilers, K. M., Mori, M., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Beer, T. M. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2004.03.025 · Cited by 555
Montorsi, F., Luigi, G. G., Strambi, L. F., Da Pozzo, L. F., Nava, L., Barbieri, L., Rigatti, P., Pizzini, G., & Miani, A. (1997) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(01)64227-7 · Cited by 547
Collagen—emerging collagen based therapies hit the patient
Abou Neel, E. A., Bozec, L., Knowles, J. C., Syed, O., Mudera, V., Day, R., & Hyun, J. K. (2013) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2012.08.010 · Cited by 296
WALSH, P. C. (2000) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67547-7 · Cited by 261
Metadata
- Authors
- Fowler, F. J., Barry, M. J., Lu-yao, G., Roman, A., Wasson, J., & Wennberg, J. E.
- Venue
- Urology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-12
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 622-628
- ISSN
- 0090-4295 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1488697037
- Cited by
- 627
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 33.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
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.