Question · asked by 1 review

Electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus biofeedback: Participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence

Electrical stimulation showed no clear difference in participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence compared with pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus biofeedback (low certainty).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Electrical stimulation vs pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus biofeedback
Participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence · Adults with overactive bladder (OAB)
Electrical stimulation showed no clear difference in participants with improvement in urgency urinary incontinence compared with pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus biofeedback (low certainty).
Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.06 [0.6, 1.85]1 study · 51 participantsLow

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Electrical stimulation with non‐implanted electrodes for overactive bladder in adults
2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
Not reportedlist not extracted yetNot assessed

Studies behind the findings

None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.