Erroneous and Incomplete Reporting of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System.

Introduction and hypothesis: Accurate and complete reporting of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system is essential for reporting research outcomes in POP. We aimed to assess the accuracy and completeness of POP-Q reporting in studies published from selected journals in 2023 and evaluate the validity of available POP-Q calculators.

Methods: A systematic search of Medline and Embase was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify eligible studies from selected journals in 2023 that utilised the POP-Q system. An assessment of available POP-Q calculators was also performed.

Results: Of the 134 studies identified, 18 (13.4%) met the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies reported complete quantitative POP-Q data of which 9 (75%) contained identifiable POP-Q reporting errors. These included 5 studies reporting mean Aa > Ba, 2 reporting mean Ap > Bp, 6 reporting C > Bp, 5 reporting mean C > Ba, 1 reporting mean Aa > + 3, and 1 reporting mean D > C. The remaining 6 of the 18 studies reported incomplete POP-Q measurements, which restricted our ability to identify further reporting errors, except for 2 studies reporting C > Ba and C > Bp respectively. The evaluated POP-Q calculator permitted the input of inaccurate POP-Q data.

Conclusions: Erroneous and/or incomplete quantitative POP-Q data were identified in 15 of the 18 studies reviewed (83.3%). Our findings highlight the need for improved POP-Q data reporting. Journal editors and reviewers should ensure that publications provide complete and accurate quantitative POP-Q data. POP-Q calculators should be based on algorithms that ensure complete and accurate data inputs and outputs.