Detrusor overactivity and urge urinary incontinence following trans obturator versus midurethral slings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the rates of resolution of detrusor overactivity (DO) and subjective urge urinary incontinence (UUI) as well as de novo DO and UUI between the Monarc, TVT, and SPARC midurethral sling procedures. METHODS: Two hundred and seventy-six subjects with urodynamic stress or mixed urinary incontinence underwent retropubic midurethral slings (TVT, N = 99; SPARC, N = 52) or transobturator slings (Monarc, N = 125). All evaluable subjects had a routine office evaluation, subjective assessment of UUI, and multichannel urodynamic testing pre- and 3 months postoperatively. Comparisons were made using Student's t-test, ANOVA, McNemar's test, and Chi-Square test where appropriate. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to detect possible confounding factors such as sling type, and differences in concomitant surgical procedures. RESULTS: De novo subjective UUI differed significantly between the Monarc and the other two slings (33% TVT vs. 8% Monarc vs. 17% SPARC, P = 0.04). Fourteen to Sixteen percents of patients with preoperative UUI who underwent TVT or SPARC had worsening of their UUI symptoms while only 6% of the Monarc group did (P = 0.02). There was no difference in rates of resolution of DO among the three groups (40% vs. 48% vs. 32%, P = 0.39) or de novo DO (32% vs. 22% vs. 22%, P = 0.64) at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo transobturator procedures have significantly lower rates of de novo UUI than those who undergo midurethral sling procedures. Rates of resolution of DO, UUI, and de novo DO do not differ between 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 it