Urinary incontinence: common problem among women over 45.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To examine age-specific prevalence and correlates of urinary incontinence (UI) among community-dwelling women. DESIGN: A questionnaire survey used a modified Dillman method. SETTING: Two family practice clinics in Hamilton, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Questionnaires were mailed to 1082 women 45 years old and older. Ninety women were disqualified; 606 recipients responded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported prevalence of UI and potential risk factors. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 61% (606/992); 51% (311/606; 95% confidence interval 47.3% to 55.3%) reported an episode of UI during the last month. Of the 311 women reporting UI, 35.7% perceived it as a problem, 27% had had it for less than a year, 41.9% had had it for 1 to 4 years, and 31.1% had had it for 5 years or longer. Three kinds of UI were reported: 34% (106/311) reported stress UI, 14.5% (45/311) reported urge UI, and 51.4% (160/311) reported a mixed pattern. In multivariate analysis, the overall prevalence of incontinence increased significantly with "usually having a cough," "being troubled by swollen ankles," "giving birth," "ever smoking cigarettes," and "being troubled by headaches." Stress UI was associated with "usually having a cough" and "ever smoking cigarettes." Urge UI was associated with "having troubles with constipation" and "swollen ankles." Mixed incontinence was associated with "get sick more than other people," "usually having a cough," "taken hormones for menopause," and body mass index in the 50th to 75th percentile or greater. Age was not significantly associated with prevalence of UI or any of its subtypes. Only 40% of incontinent women indicated they had discussed urine loss with their physicians; 70% of these women felt satisfied with physicians' responses. CONCLUSION: Incontinence occurs in more than half of community-dwelling women 45 years old and older. Almost one of five women in the community reported UI that affected normal activities. Treating the effect of incontinence will require further understanding of women's coping skills and self-perceptions. Prevalence does not appear to increase with age.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».