↓ Skip to main content

Adjustable single-incision mini-slings (Ajust®) versus other slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Urology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adjustable single-incision mini-slings (Ajust®) versus other slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications
Published in
BMC Urology, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12894-018-0357-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fuding Bai, Jimin Chen, Zhewei Zhang, Yichun Zheng, Jiaming Wen, Xiawa Mao, Nan Zhang

Abstract

Adjustable single-incision mini-sling (SIMS) is a new category of SIMS for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of adjustable single-incision mini-sling with other slings. Literature search in databases such as Pubmed, and Conchrane Library was performed up to December, 2015. The outcomes including cure rate, operation time, postoperative pain score and complications were reanalyzed. The pooled relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated by RevMan v5.0. Eight studies with 1093 SUI female patients were included. There was no significant difference between adjustable SIMS and other slings (transobturator slings and MiniArc) in patients subjective cure rate and objective cure rate. In addition, adjustable SIMS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time and lower postoperative pain score when comparing adjustable SIMS with transobturator tape (MD = - 1.35; 95%CI: -2.24 to - 0.46, P = 0.003). For the complications, there was also no significant difference between adjustable SIMS and transobturator slings. Adjustable SIMS had equally efficacy for SUI compared with transobturator slings and MiniArc. However, the significantly shorter operative time and lower postoperative pain score than transobturator tape supported the clinical application of adjustable SIMS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 11%
Professor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 18 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2019.
All research outputs
#2,617,528
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#58
of 775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,313
of 331,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,314 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.