24. All types of urinary incontinence: primary outcome participant‐reported cure or improvement; conservative versus non‐conservative.
| Analysis code (in review) | Study ID | Comparisons included | Outcome measure (timing of measure) | Included trials (n) | Effect measure | Effect estimate (CI) | Direction of effect | Evidence of beneficial effect? | Number of downgrades (reason for downgrade) |
| Moderate‐certainty evidence | |||||||||
| 2.1.2 | Alhasso 2005 | Adrenergic agonist vs conservative therapy | UC |
Wells 1991 (n = 157) |
RR | 1.4 (1.1 to 1.8) | > 1 favours drug | YES favours drugs | 1(H) |
| Low‐certainty evidence | |||||||||
| 2.3.2 | Alhasso 2005 | Adrenergic agonist vs conservative therapy | UC |
Wells 1991 (n = 86) |
RR | 0.9 (0.5 to 1.4) | > 1 favours drug; differential dropout from groups, more from PFMT group (P < 0.01) | NO | 4(C, E×2, H) |
| 1.3.1 | Rai 2012 | Anticholinergic drugs vs bladder training | IM |
Macaulay 1987 (n = 29) |
RR | 1.0 (0.7 to 1.3) | > 1 favours bladder training | NO | 3(E×2, H) |
Abbreviations: CI: confidence interval; IM: immediate; n: number of participants; RR: risk ratio; UC: unclear. Codes for GRADE assessment: A: blinding of outcome assessor; B: allocation concealment; C: differential attrition; D: ROBIS domain 2; E: CIs plus sample size; F: heterogeneity using I2 statistic; G: type of UI was unclear or not reported; H: unclear or not reported for blinding, allocation and differential attrition.