A Review of Educational Programs to Reduce UTIs Among Individuals with SCI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of educational programs in reducing urinary tract infections (UTIs) in individuals with spinal cord injuries (SCI). METHODS: A search of all relevant literature published up to and including July 2012 was conducted using multiple databases. Methodological quality was rated using the PEDro tool for randomized control trials (RCTs) and the Downs and Black tool for non-RCTs; levels of evidence were assigned using a modified Sackett scale. FINDINGS: Four articles were selected for review. As a result of an education program, a level 2 prospective control trial reported a reduction in number of UTIs (p = .02), but a level 2 RCT did not. A pre-post study found a reduction in number of UTIs while a case-control study did not; however, these studies did not compute statistics. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited positive evidence that education programs reduce the incidence of UTIs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Optimal urinary health of individuals with SCI may be optimized via education programs that provide information and enhance skills.
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 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".