CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 222Urinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchPelvic floor disorders treatmentsUrinary Tract Infections Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Urine Leakage in a Racially and Ethnically Diverse Population of Adults: The Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey

Tennstedt, S. L., Link, C. L., Steers, W. D., McKinlay, J. B.·2008·American Journal of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1093/aje/kwm356
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Most epidemiologic studies of urine leakage in the United States report on women and White populations. In this study, the authors determined the prevalence of urine leakage across genders and racial/ethnic groups in a population-based sample of 5,506 adults aged 30-79 years and identified factors related to leakage within genders and racial/ethnic groups. The prevalence of weekly urine leakage was 8% overall, 10.4% in women, and 5.3% in men. White women (11.7%) were more likely than Black (9.4%) and Hispanic (7.3%) women to report weekly leakage and to report stress-type (35.4% vs. 9.4% and 14.5%, respectively) and urge-type (13.4% vs. 3.3% and 10.8%, respectively) leakage. Rates and leakage types for men did not vary by race/ethnicity. For women, central obesity, asthma, and arthritis increased the odds of weekly leakage. For men, the odds of leakage increased for Blacks and Whites at ages 50 and 60 years, respectively, and for Hispanics of higher social class. For both genders, various comorbid conditions, including heart disease, asthma, and depression, increased the odds of leakage in varying racial/ethnic groups. The authors conclude that types of and risk factors for urine leakage vary by gender and racial/ethnic group.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/aje/kwm356

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 222

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Tennstedt, S. L., Link, C. L., Steers, W. D., & McKinlay, J. B.
Affiliations
  • New England Research Institutes (US)
  • University of Virginia Health System (US)
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2008-01-07
Volume
167
Issue
4
Pages
390-399
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
DOI
10.1093/aje/kwm356
OpenAlex
W2098468480
Cited by
222
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
FWCI
22.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK56842)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
Keywords
urinary incontinence, prevalence, risk factors, racial and ethnic differences, gender differences, stress urinary incontinence, urge urinary incontinence, abdominal obesity, asthma, arthritis, comorbidities, social class, adults
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Arthritis, Asthma, Black or African American, Boston, Depression, Female, Health Surveys, Heart Diseases, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Urinary Incontinence, Prevalence, Cluster Analysis, Odds Ratio, White People

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