Effects of <scp>PFM</scp> rehabilitation on <scp>PFM</scp> function and morphology in older women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a pelvic floor muscle (PFM) rehabilitation program on incontinence symptoms, PFM function, and morphology in older women with SUI. METHODS: Women 60 years old and older with at least weekly episodes of SUI were recruited. Participants were evaluated before and after a 12-week group PFM rehabilitation intervention. The evaluations included 3-day bladder diaries, symptom, and quality of life questionnaires, PFM function testing with dynamometry (force) and electromyography (activation) during seven tasks: rest, PFM maximum voluntary contraction (MVC), straining, rapid-repeated PFM contractions, a 60 sec sustained PFM contraction, a single cough and three repeated coughs, and sagittal MRI recorded at rest, during PFM MVCs and during straining to assess PFM morphology. RESULTS: Seventeen women (68.9 ± 5.5 years) participated. Following the intervention the frequency of urine leakage decreased and disease-specific quality of life improved significantly. PFM function improved significantly: the participants were able to perform more rapid-repeated PFM contractions; they activated their PFMs sooner when coughing and they were better able to maintain a PFM contraction between repeated coughs. Pelvic organ support improved significantly: the anorectal angle was decreased and the urethrovescial junction was higher at rest, during contraction and while straining. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that improvements in urine leakage were produced along with improvements in PFM co-ordination (demonstrated by the increased number of rapid PFM contractions and the earlier PFM activation when coughing), motor-control, pelvic organ support.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".