Objective: to determine the positive predictive value of clinical history in comparison with urodynamic study for the diagnosis of urinary incontinence. Methods: retrospective analysis comparing clinical history and urodynamic evaluation of 1,179 women with urinary incontinence. The urodynamic study was considered the gold standard, whereas the clinical history was the new test to be assessed. This was established after analyzing each method as the gold standard through the difference between their positive predictive values. Results: the positive predictive values of clinical history compared with urodynamic study for diagnosis of stress urinary incontinence, overactive bladder and mixed urinary incontinence were, respectively, 37% (95% CI 31-44), 40% (95% CI 33-47) and 16% (95% CI 14-19). Conclusion: we concluded that the positive predictive value of clinical history was low compared with urodynamic study for urinary incontinence diagnosis. The positive predictive value was low even among women with pure stress urinary incontinence.