Question · asked by 1 review
Traditional suburethral sling operation vs bladder neck (needle) suspension: Disease‐specific quality of life
- Population
- women with urinary incontinence
- Intervention
- Traditional suburethral sling operation
- Comparison
- bladder neck (needle) suspension
- Outcome
- Disease‐specific quality of life
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Traditional suburethral sling operation vs bladder neck needle suspension (abdominal and vaginal) Condition‐specific quality of life · women with urinary incontinence The review found no eligible studies for this question. Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs conservative management · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs injectable treatment · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs no treatment/sham · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs drugs · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs laparoscopic colposuspension · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
- Traditional suburethral sling operation vs anterior repair · women with urinary incontinence · 1 review
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.