ExploreStudyPMC2877497
Study

PMC2877497

15 findings 1 paper 11 related entities View in graph →

Related entities

interventions
conditions
outcomes
populations

Findings (50)

None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

Women in the weight-loss group perceived greater improvement in incontinence frequency, lower volume of urine loss, regarded incontinence as less of a problem, and reported higher treatment satisfacti

Effect: improvement; P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures

Size: P<0.001 for all four satisfaction measures
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease
None
improvement

The reduction in urinary incontinence from the weight-loss intervention was primarily attributable to stress incontinence, with the intervention group achieving a 57.6% decrease compared to 32.7% in c

Effect: improvement; 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Size: 57.6% decrease vs 32.7% decrease

Papers (1)