MP03-01 THE BURDEN OF URETHRAL STRICTURE DISEASE IN THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyTrauma/Reconstruction/Diversion: Urethral Reconstruction (including Stricture, Diverticulum) I (MP03)1 Sep 2021MP03-01 THE BURDEN OF URETHRAL STRICTURE DISEASE IN THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO R. Christopher Doiron, Marlo Whitehead, Christopher M. Booth, and D. Robert Siemens R. Christopher DoironR. Christopher Doiron More articles by this author , Marlo WhiteheadMarlo Whitehead More articles by this author , Christopher M. BoothChristopher M. Booth More articles by this author , and D. Robert SiemensD. Robert Siemens More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001964.01AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Urethral stricture disease (USD) is a rare, but frequently morbid condition while access to Canadian surgeons with expertise in urethroplasty is lacking. We describe the burden of USD in the province of Ontario and explore management patterns. METHODS: All male patients with USD in the province of Ontario who received care related to their diagnosis between Apr 2002 – Mar 2020 were identified using data from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. Stricture incidence was calculated while an analysis of health care utilization included outpatient, inpatient and emergency department visits for care related to their stricture diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 118,721 men were identified with a urethral stricture diagnosis during the study period – 66,868 incident cases and 51,853 prevalent cases. Incidence of urethral stricture over the study period was 8 cases/10,000 person years. Overall median (IQR) age at time of diagnosis was 61 (44-72). Over the study period, 2.1% (n=2,448) of patients visited emergency departments (ED) ≥1 due to USD, while 27.3% (n=32,390) had ≥1 ED visit for diagnoses other than USD, determined to be complications secondary to USD. A total of 12.2% (n=14,464) of patients required ≥1 urologic USD–associated intervention in the ED, while 1.7% (n=2,102) required ≥3. Over half (52.2%; n=61,982) of patients were seen in outpatient consultation directly related to USD and 68% (n=80,773) were seen for a non-USD diagnosis determined to be a complication secondary to USD. Patients underwent a mean (SD) of 7.6 (±23.5) diagnostic procedures and 1.4 (±5.4) endoscopic interventions as treatment of their USD during the study period. A total of 1,386 patients (1.2%) underwent a single open reconstruction for treatment of their urethral stricture, while n=253 (0.2%) had ≥2 open procedures during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: USD is not rare, carries a significant burden on the health care system in Ontario with few receiving definitive treatment with urethroplasty. Source of Funding: N/A © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e21-e21 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information R. Christopher Doiron More articles by this author Marlo Whitehead More articles by this author Christopher M. Booth More articles by this author D. Robert Siemens More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».