Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Review of the epidemiology of overactive bladder

Open access
Eapen, Renu, Radomski, Sidney·2016·Research and Reports in Urology

Abstract

Overactive bladder (OAB) is common in both men and women. It is a symptom complex that causes significant detriment to quality of life in patients. Although the prevalence of OAB is similar in both sexes, there are sex-specific differences in individual symptoms and the impact on quality of life. The coexistence of benign prostatic hyperplasia with OAB can worsen quality of life in men. This review examines the major studies that looked at the epidemiology of OAB as it relates to both sexes. It focuses on both the overall prevalence rates and the incidence of individual symptoms. This paper also addresses the level of bother and quality of life in men and women with OAB. In addition, the relationship between OAB and benign prostatic hyperplasia is reviewed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2147/rru.s102441

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
Eapen, R., & Radomski, S.
Venue
Research and Reports in Urology
Published
2016-06
Volume
8
Pages
71
ISSN
  • 1179-1551 (ISSN-L)
  • 2253-2447
OpenAlex
W2416611247
Cited by
158
References
0
FWCI
13.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.