Imperial College London
Alternate

ProfessorElioRiboli

Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health

Chair in Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

e.riboli Website CV

 
 
//

Assistant

 

Ms Julieta Dourado +44 (0)20 7594 3426

 
//

Location

 

152Medical SchoolSt Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Aune:2019:10.1111/1471-0528.15897,
author = {Aune, D and Yahya, M-S and Norat, T and Riboli, E},
doi = {10.1111/1471-0528.15897},
journal = {BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology},
pages = {1424--1433},
title = {Body mass index, abdominal fatness, weight gain and the risk of urinary incontinence: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15897},
volume = {126},
year = {2019}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND: Adiposity has been associated with elevated risk of urinary incontinence in epidemiological studies, however, the strength of the association has differed between studies. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic literature review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies on adiposity and risk of urinary incontinence. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched PubMed and Embase databases up to July 19th 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Prospective cohort studies were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects models. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty four prospective studies were included. The summary RR per 5 kg/m2 increment in BMI was 1.20 (95% confidence interval: 1.16-1.25, I2 =58%, n=13) for population-based studies and 1.19 (95% CI: 1.08-1.30, I2 =87.1%, n=8) for pregnancy-based studies, 1.18 (95% CI: 1.14-1.22, I2 =0%, n=2) per 10 cm increase in waist circumference and 1.34 (95% CI: 1.11-1.62, I2 =90%, n=2) per 10 kg of weight gain. Although the test for nonlinearity was significant for BMI, p=0.04, the association was approximately linear. For subtypes of urinary incontinence the summary RR per 5 BMI units was 1.45 (95% CI: 1.25-1.68, I2 =85%, n=3) for frequent incontinence, 1.52 (95% CI: 1.37-1.68, I2 =34%, n=4) for severe incontinence, 1.33 (95% CI: 1.26-1.41, I2 =0%, n=8) for stress incontinence, 1.26 (95% CI: 1.14-1.40, I2 =70%, n=7) for urge incontinence, and 1.52 (95% CI: 1.36-1.69, I2 =0%, n=3) for mixed incontinence. CONCLUSION: These results suggest excess weight may increase risk of urinary incontinence. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
AU  - Aune,D
AU  - Yahya,M-S
AU  - Norat,T
AU  - Riboli,E
DO  - 10.1111/1471-0528.15897
EP  - 1433
PY  - 2019///
SN  - 1470-0328
SP  - 1424
TI  - Body mass index, abdominal fatness, weight gain and the risk of urinary incontinence: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies
T2  - BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15897
UR  - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31376211
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/74115
VL  - 126
ER  -
Download