<b>Editorial:</b> Editors' introduction: Bladder outflow obstruction in women
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Readers, We are delighted to present to you this special section of NUU journal dedicated to the comprehensive exploration and treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in women. BOO, a condition often underrepresented in medical literature, has significant implications for female health and quality of life. This collection of research papers, reviews, and clinical perspectives aims to shed light on the complexities of BOO in women, highlighting its underlying causes, diagnostic challenges, and evolving management strategies. This special issue brings together the collective expertise of distinguished researchers and clinicians dedicated to understanding and managing BOO in women. It encompasses a wide range of topics, including epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical evaluation, and various treatment modalities from the less to the most invasive ones. We have gathered original research studies, review articles, and clinical case reports, providing a multidimensional approach to the subject matter. The papers in this issue delve into the intricate aspects of BOO in women, addressing the challenges faced in accurate diagnosis and individualized treatment. We explore diagnostic techniques, such as urodynamic studies and imaging modalities, which play a pivotal role in understanding the complex dynamics of female BOO. Furthermore, the authors discuss innovative therapeutic interventions, both conservative and surgical, to improve symptoms, restore bladder function, and enhance the overall quality of life for affected women. Moreover, this issue recognizes the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration and emphasizes the need for a holistic approach to the management of BOO in women. The integration of urologists, gynecologists, physiotherapists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals is vital in providing comprehensive care tailored to individual patient needs. We highlight successful collaborative efforts and emphasize the importance of shared knowledge and expertise in optimizing treatment outcomes. As editors, we express our heartfelt appreciation to all the contributors who have shared their research and experiences in this field. Their invaluable contributions from the bedrock of this special issue and offer a wealth of knowledge to the medical community at large. We are confident that the insights presented within these pages will inspire further research, facilitate clinical decision-making, and ultimately improve the lives of women suffering from BOO. We invite you to explore the wealth of information presented in this special issue, encouraging discussions and debates that foster innovation and collaboration in the field. By addressing the challenges surrounding BOO in women head-on, we aim to promote better understanding, improved management strategies, and ultimately enhanced patient outcomes. Sincerely, Lysanne Campeau and Jacques Corcos MDs
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 | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».