The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Obstetric practice and the prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery
Abstract
Objective To examine the relation between obstetric factors and the prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery. Design 2134 postal questionnaires sent between August 1989 and June 1991. Setting Teaching hospital in Dunedin, New Zealand. Subjects All women three months postpartum who were resident in the Dunedin area. Main outcome measure Prevalence of urinary incontinence. Results 1505 questionnaires were returned (70.5% response rate). At three months postpartum 34.3% of women admitted to some degree of urinary incontinence with 3.3% having daily or more frequent leakage. There was a significant reduction in the prevalence of incontinence for women having a caesarean section, in particular in primiparous women with a history of no previous incontinence (prevalence of incontinence following a vaginal delivery 24.5%, following a caesarean section 5.2% P = 0.002). There was little difference between elective caesarean sections and those carried out in the first and second stages of labour. The odds ratios for women having a caesarean section were 0.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2–0.7) (all women and all primiparae) and 02 (95% CI 0.0–0.6) (primipara with no previous incontinence) in comparison with those having a normal vaginal delivery. The prevalence of incontinence was also significantly lower in women having had two caesarean sections (23.3%; P = 0.05) but similar in those women having three or more caesarean sections (38.9 YO) in comparison with those women who delivered vaginally (37.7%). Other significant independent odds ratios were found for daily antenatal pelvic floor exercises (PFE) (0.6, 95% CI 0.4–09), parity ≥5 (2.2, 95% CI 1.0–4.9) and pre‐pregnancy body mass index (1.07, 95% CI 1.04–1.10). Conclusions Adverse risk factors for urinary incontinence at three months postpartum are vaginal delivery, obesity and multiparity (2 5). Caesarean section and daily antenatal PFE appear to be protective, although not completely so.
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
Cited by
Glazener, C. M. A., Herbison, G. P., Wilson, P. D., MacArthur, C., Lang, G. D., Gee, H., & Grant, A. M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7313.593 · Cited by 190
Self-citationGlazener, C., MacArthur, C., Hagen, S., Elders, A., Lancashire, R., Herbison, G., Wilson, P., & The ProLong Study Group (2014) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12473 · Cited by 64
Self-citationYang, S., Sang, W., Feng, J., Zhao, H., Li, X., Li, P., Fan, H., Tang, Z., & Gao, L. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/jocn.13790 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, P. D., Herbison, R. M., & Herbison, G. P.
- Venue
- BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-02
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 154-161
- ISSN
- 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-0328
- 1471-0528
- OpenAlex
- W1984881061
- Cited by
- 419
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Obstetric practice and the prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09668.x
- The paper
- Wilson, P. D., Herbison, R. M., & Herbison, G. P. (1996). Obstetric practice and the prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09668.x
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.