Validation of the bladder control self‐assessment questionnaire ( <scp>B</scp> ‐ <scp>SAQ</scp> ) in men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Bladder Control Self-Assessment Questionnaire (B-SAQ), a short screener to assess lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and overactive bladder (OAB) in men. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, single-centre study including 211 patients in a urology outpatient setting. All patients completed the B-SAQ and Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) before consultation, and the consulting urologist made an independent assessment of LUTS and the need for treatment. The psychometric properties of the B-SAQ were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 98% of respondents completed all items correctly in <5 min. The mean B-SAQ scores were 12 and 3.3, respectively for cases (n = 101) and controls (n = 108) (P < 0.001). Good correlation was evident between the B-SAQ and the KHQ. The agreement percentages between the individual B-SAQ items and the KHQ symptom severity scale were 86, 85, 84 and 79% for frequency, urgency, nocturia and urinary incontinence, respectively. Using a B-SAQ symptom score threshold of ≥4 alone had sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values for detecting LUTS of 75, 86 and 84%, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.88; however, in combination with a bother score threshold of ≥1 these values changed to 92, 46 and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The B-SAQ is an easy and quick valid case-finding tool for LUTS/OAB in men, but appears to be less specific in men than in women. The B-SAQ has the potential to raise awareness of LUTS. Further validation in a community setting is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".