Back to publication

OnabotulinumtoxinA 100 U Significantly Improves All Idiopathic Overactive Bladder Symptoms and Quality of Life in Patients with Overactive Bladder and Urinary Incontinence: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Assessed by RV011 · Statistician

Assessed on 17 Nov 2025

OverallReviewer's overall integrity assessment, derived from all research questions No concerns

DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.001 (opens in new tab)

Resource ripekg:research-integrity-assessment/RIPEA62FEC5B159F50CEC

5 Research Questions · 2 Evidence Items

Q1.1 — Does the study have an associated retraction?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsN/A

Rationale: No rationale provided

Q1.2 — Does the study have an associated expression of concern or other relevant post-publication notice?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo

Rationale: There have been no post publication concerns that I am aware of.

Q1.3 — Do other studies by the research team highlight causes for concern?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo

Rationale: I agree with the

Q2.2 — Are there concerns relating to the timing or absence of study registration?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemNo
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo

Rationale: The first registration of the study was in May 2009, so I have no concerns.

Supporting Evidence (2)

Clinical Trial RegistrationSource: Clinical trial registry (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN)

Registration ID: NCT00910520

Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry Link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00910520 (opens in new tab)

Registration Date: 29-05-2009

Prospective:Whether the trial was registered before participant recruitment began Yes

Assessment Rationale:How INSPECT-AI determined the prospective registration status by comparing dates Comparison performed at month level. Registration: 2009-05, LLM Recruitment Start: 2009-10. Deemed prospective at month level.

Study Design EvidenceDates and timelines extracted by INSPECT-AI from the publication text

Recruitment Start: 10-2009

Recruitment Start Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment start date Methods: 'This large, phase 3...study was conducted from October 2009 to August 2011...'; no specific FPI date found, using start of conducted range as recruitment_start per rule 5.

Recruitment End: N/A

Recruitment End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the recruitment end date No explicit end-of-recruitment date after full search; range end is not used for recruitment_finish.

Study End: 08-2011

Study End Rationale:INSPECT-AI's reasoning for how it identified the study end date Methods: 'This large, phase 3...study was conducted from October 2009 to August 2011...'; no specific completion date, using end of conducted range as study_end_date per rule 5.

Overall — What is the overall integrity assessment of the study?

Automated Assessment:Assessment produced by the automated systemN/A
Human Assessment:Assessment by a domain expert reviewer, informed by AI resultsNo concerns

Rationale: I don't have any concerns with the study.