MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988592836 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11187

Systematic review of therapy for neurogenic detrusor overactivity

2011· article· en· W1988592836 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Clare J. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryMultiple sclerosisPharmacotherapyDetrusor muscleAdverse effectBotulinum toxinOveractive bladderQuality of life (healthcare)Neurogenic bladder dysfunctionUrologyInternal medicineSpinal cordAnesthesiaUrinary bladderPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While many neurologic diseases predispose patients to neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO), the only populations that have been systematically studied are adults with multiple sclerosis (MS), adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) and children and young adults with myelodysplasia. First-line pharmacotherapy for NDO is an anti-muscarinic drug. However, the evidence base for these agents in this indication is poor. There is some high-quality evidence for the efficacy of detrusor injections of botulinum toxin A in the treatment of NDO, with significant reduction in urgency incontinence episodes, improved urodynamic parameters, and improved quality of life. While few adverse events have been reported with this therapy, there is a need for intermittent self-catheterization in these groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207