The prevalence of urinary incontinence in elderly Canadians and its association with dementia, ambulatory function, and institutionalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study objectives: Design and setting: Main results: Conclusion: Key words: urinary incontinence; dementia; institutionalization; community-institutional relationsUrinary incontinence is a prevalent condition among the elderly, and is associated withage, dementia, and ambulatory function. Although incontinence is highly prevalent among institutionalizedpersons, the majority of persons with incontinence live in the community.Overall, 16.9% of the women and 8.0% of the men reported incontinence, the numbersfor daily incontinence were 7.0% and 5.2% respectively. The prevalence increased by age, severity ofdementia, and decreasing ambulatory function. It is calculated that 69% of elderly men and 73% ofelderly women with any incontinence live in the community. 31% of the male and 32% of the femalepatients have some kind or severity of dementia, and 21% of the men and 27% of the women havedecreased ambulatory function. One half of the persons with incontinence live in the community, withno cognitive or ambulatory impairment.Population based multi-centre survey with stratified random sampling all overCanada. Randomly selected persons aged 65 and over were interviewed. Those having cognitive impairment(n=1614), a randomly selected sample of those without (n=731) and an institutional sample(n=1255) underwent clinical assessment.Data from The Canadian Study of Health and Aging are analysed for prevalence ofurinary incontinence, and its association with dementia, ambulatory function, and institutionalization.ABSTRACT
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".