Prostatitis‐like symptoms: one year later
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To re-survey (after 1 year) men identified in 1999 as having perineal and/or ejaculatory pain/discomfort severe enough to suggest a clinical diagnosis of chronic prostatitis (using the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index, NIH-CPSI), and to compare them with an age-matched population of men who had no prostatitis-like symptoms in the initial survey, to determine the effect of time on specific symptoms associated with the diagnosis of chronic prostatitis. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A comprehensive questionnaire incorporating the pain and voiding domains of the NIH-CPSI, and data on demographics, medical history, socio-economic status, health-seeking behaviour and a quality of life assessment, was sent to 67 men who had reported prostatitis-like symptoms in the 1999 survey, and to 202 age-matched controls (1 : 3) who reported no prostatitis-like symptoms in the same survey. RESULTS: Forty men (60%) with previous prostatitis-like symptoms, i.e. a mean (sd) 1999 NIH-CPSI pain score of 8.8 (0.4), and 119 (59%) of the control population completed and returned the survey. There was no difference in the 1999 demographics (P = 0.82) or NIH-CPSI pain score (P = 0.49) between patients who returned the recent questionnaire and those who could not be located or declined to complete the survey. Fifteen men (38%) identified with prostatitis in 1999 did not report similar symptoms in 2000. The initial mean NIH-CPSI pain score (0-21) for the men who had resolution of their prostatitis-like symptoms was 7.5 (0.6); 1 year later it was 0.73 (0.3). Their mean age was 51.1 (3.9) years and mean duration of symptoms 1.1 (0.3) years. Those with persistent symptoms had an initial NIH-CPSI pain score of 9.6 (0.5); 1 year later it was 8.68 (0.4), at mean age of 51.4 (2.5) years and duration of symptoms 2.2 (0.3) years. Four men (3%) in the control group who had no symptoms in 1999 reported prostatitis-like symptoms in 2000; these men had a mean age of 52.5 (5.9) and NIH-CPSI pain score of 7.0 (0.9). CONCLUSION: About a third of men reporting prostatitis-like symptoms in the general population had resolution of their symptoms (usually those with a shorter duration and less severe symptoms) 1 year later. The severity of symptoms of men with persistent chronic prostatitis remained relatively unchanged over the year.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".