Lower urinary tract symptoms and urinary incontinence in a geriatric cohort – a population‐based analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess prevalence and severity of lower urinary tract function in 85-year-old men and women. Little is known on the prevalence of lower urinary tract dysfunction in this geriatric age group, which is now the fastest growing sector of the population worldwide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Vienna Trans-Danube Aging study (VITA) is a longitudinal, population-based study initiated in 2000 that included men/women aged 75 years living in a well-defined area in Vienna. The main purpose of the VITA study was to identify risk factors for incident Alzheimer's disease. All study participants alive in 2010 were contacted by mail to complete a detailed questionnaire on various aspects of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and urinary incontinence (UI). RESULTS: The response rate was 68%, resulting in a total of 262 questionnaires available for analysis (men n= 96; women n= 166). All study participants were 85 years of age. Urinary incontinence defined as any involuntary loss during the past 4 weeks was reported by 24% of men and 35% of women (P= 0.04). Stress UI was more frequent in women (39%) than in men (14%, P < 0.01), the difference for urge UI (women 35%, men 25%) was on the border of statistical significance (P= 0.05). Only four individuals (1.5%) needed permanent catheterization. Urgency (women 56%, men 54%) and daytime frequency (women 70%, men 74%) were equally distributed (P > 0.05). Nocturia more often than twice was more prevalent in men (69%) than in women (49%) (P= 0.02). Overactive bladder, according to International Continence Society criteria, was present in 55% of women and 50% of men. No difference regarding quality of life impairment as the result of LUTS and UI was noticed between sexes. A few co-morbidities were identified to correlate with UI and storage symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into the prevalence and severity of LUTS and UI in individuals in their eighties, to our knowledge the largest population-based study in this age group. Demographic changes in upcoming decades underline the importance of a thorough understanding of lower urinary tract dysfunction in a geriatric population.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".