To what extent are national guidelines for the management of urinary incontinence in women adhered? Data from a national audit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: OBJECTIVE To assess the degree of adherence to the current National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines on the management of urinary incontinence (UI) in women. DESIGN: Retrospective survey of consecutive female inpatients and outpatients with UI as part of a national audit. SETTING: NHS hospital and primary care (PC) trusts. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Twenty-five women <65 years old and 25 women ≥ 65 years old from each participating site. METHOD: All NHS trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland were eligible to participate. A web-based data collection form aligned to the NICE guidelines was constructed for the study. All data submitted to the audit were anonymous and access to the web-tool was password-protected for confidentiality. RESULTS: Data were returned by 128 acute and 75 PC trusts on 7846 women. No diagnosis was documented in 6.8% (153/2254) of younger and 28% (571/2011) of older women in hospitals (P < 0.001), and by 8.6% (123/1435) of younger and 21% (380/1786) of older women in PC trusts. In hospitals, 26% (396/1524) of younger women and 15% (182/1231) of older women (P < 0.001) and in PC trusts 8.2% (77/934) of younger and 4.7% (46/975) of older women underwent multichannel cystometry before conservative therapy. Documentation of discussion of causes and treatment of UI occurred in 76% (1717/2254) of younger and 44% (884/2011) of older women in hospitals (P < 0.001) and in 75% (1080/1435) of younger and 53% (948/1786) of older women in PC trusts (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Older women are less likely to receive NICE compliant management. Adherence varies according to recommendation. There needs to be concentration on evidence-based community provision of care by competent and interested clinicians before the aims of the NICE guidelines are met.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".