Comment on: Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice

Comment on: Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional... Int Urogynecol J (2017) 28:1439 DOI 10.1007/s00192-017-3359-7 LETTER TO THE EDITOR Comment on: Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice 1 2 3 4,5 Shiva Mansouri Hanis & Salman Khazaei & Erfan Ayubi & Kamyar Mansori Received: 24 March 2017 /Accepted: 15 April 2017 /Published online: 26 July 2017 The International Urogynecological Association 2017 Dear Sir, models [2]. In other words, the temporality assumption (the We read the paper by Panman et al. entitled BPredictors of dependent variable responds to changes in the independent unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a variable) must be ensured in the prediction model. Thus, pre- cross-sectional study in general practice^ [1]. This study was diction models resulting from cross-sectional designs can be performed to generate hypotheses about independent risk fac- misleading [2, 3]. tors for unsuccessful pessary fitting in general practice. It was Second, considering the variables patient age, higher BMI concluded that the variables lower patient age, higher body and underactive or inactive pelvic floor muscles as indepen- mass index (BMI) and underactive or inactive pelvic floor dent predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with muscles are factors predicting unsuccessful pessary fitting in prolapse are an optimistic interpretation. The internal and ex- general practice [1]. However, although this was a valuable ternal validation of the prediction model must be done through investigation and its findings are very interesting, some meth- bootstrapping and split validation, respectively [4]. odological issues should be considered. Therefore, the results of this study should be interpreted First, the study by Panman et al. [1] evaluated predictors of with consideration of the points discussed above. unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse in a Compliance with ethical standards cross-sectional study, whereas longitudinal studies are more appropriate for making assumptions for clinical prediction Conflicts of interest None. An author’s reply to this comment is available at doi:10.1007/ s00192-017-3421-5. References * Kamyar Mansori 1. Panman CM, Wiegersma M, Kollen BJ, Burger H, Berger MY, kamyarmansori@yahoo.com Dekker JH. Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice. Int Urogynecol Dezful University of Medical Sciences, Dezful, Iran J. 2017:28(2):307–13. 2. Steyerberg E. Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan development, validation, and updating. New York: Springer- University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran Verlag; 2009. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Shahid 3. Ayubi E, Sani M. Carotid atherosclerosis is associated with left ven- Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran tricular diastolic function: methodological issue. J Echocardiogr. 2016;14(4):181. Social Development & Health Promotion Research Center, Gonabad 4. Noto D, Cefalù A, Barbagallo C, Ganci A, Cavera G, Fayer F, et al. University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran Baseline metabolic disturbances and the twenty-five years risk of Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Iran incident cancer in a Mediterranean population. Nutr Metab University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Cardiovasc Dis. 2016;26(11):1020–5. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Urogynecology Journal Springer Journals

Comment on: Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice

Free
1 page

Loading next page...
1 Page
 
/lp/springer_journal/comment-on-predictors-of-unsuccessful-pessary-fitting-in-women-with-c1UlgS9npl
Publisher
Springer London
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by The International Urogynecological Association
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Gynecology; Urology
ISSN
0937-3462
eISSN
1433-3023
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00192-017-3359-7
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Int Urogynecol J (2017) 28:1439 DOI 10.1007/s00192-017-3359-7 LETTER TO THE EDITOR Comment on: Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice 1 2 3 4,5 Shiva Mansouri Hanis & Salman Khazaei & Erfan Ayubi & Kamyar Mansori Received: 24 March 2017 /Accepted: 15 April 2017 /Published online: 26 July 2017 The International Urogynecological Association 2017 Dear Sir, models [2]. In other words, the temporality assumption (the We read the paper by Panman et al. entitled BPredictors of dependent variable responds to changes in the independent unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a variable) must be ensured in the prediction model. Thus, pre- cross-sectional study in general practice^ [1]. This study was diction models resulting from cross-sectional designs can be performed to generate hypotheses about independent risk fac- misleading [2, 3]. tors for unsuccessful pessary fitting in general practice. It was Second, considering the variables patient age, higher BMI concluded that the variables lower patient age, higher body and underactive or inactive pelvic floor muscles as indepen- mass index (BMI) and underactive or inactive pelvic floor dent predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with muscles are factors predicting unsuccessful pessary fitting in prolapse are an optimistic interpretation. The internal and ex- general practice [1]. However, although this was a valuable ternal validation of the prediction model must be done through investigation and its findings are very interesting, some meth- bootstrapping and split validation, respectively [4]. odological issues should be considered. Therefore, the results of this study should be interpreted First, the study by Panman et al. [1] evaluated predictors of with consideration of the points discussed above. unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse in a Compliance with ethical standards cross-sectional study, whereas longitudinal studies are more appropriate for making assumptions for clinical prediction Conflicts of interest None. An author’s reply to this comment is available at doi:10.1007/ s00192-017-3421-5. References * Kamyar Mansori 1. Panman CM, Wiegersma M, Kollen BJ, Burger H, Berger MY, kamyarmansori@yahoo.com Dekker JH. Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice. Int Urogynecol Dezful University of Medical Sciences, Dezful, Iran J. 2017:28(2):307–13. 2. Steyerberg E. Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan development, validation, and updating. New York: Springer- University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran Verlag; 2009. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Shahid 3. Ayubi E, Sani M. Carotid atherosclerosis is associated with left ven- Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran tricular diastolic function: methodological issue. J Echocardiogr. 2016;14(4):181. Social Development & Health Promotion Research Center, Gonabad 4. Noto D, Cefalù A, Barbagallo C, Ganci A, Cavera G, Fayer F, et al. University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran Baseline metabolic disturbances and the twenty-five years risk of Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Iran incident cancer in a Mediterranean population. Nutr Metab University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Cardiovasc Dis. 2016;26(11):1020–5.

Journal

International Urogynecology JournalSpringer Journals

Published: Jul 26, 2017

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off