Urgency Urinary Incontinence in Women 50 Years or Older
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: : To estimate 2-year incidence, remission, and predictors of urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) in a community-based population of women 50 years or older. METHODS: : We analyzed the 2004 to 2006 data in the Health and Retirement Study. Subjects were women 50 years or older with baseline and follow-up UUI information. Urgency urinary incontinence incidence and remission were calculated. Predictors of UUI progression and improvement were estimated controlling for age, ethnicity, body mass index, parity, psychiatric illness, medical comorbidities, functional limitations, and stress urinary incontinence. We evaluated whether baseline UUI status predicted follow-up status and used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictor variables. RESULTS: : A total of 8581 women reported UUI status at baseline and follow-up. Of 7244 women continent at baseline, 268 affirmed UUI at follow-up for a 2-year incidence of 3.7%. Of 581 women with UUI at baseline, 150 were continent at follow-up for a 2-year remission of 25.8%. Predictors of UUI development included increased age (7th and 10th decades compared with 6th decade; OR, 1.5 and 7.2; confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.1 and 4.2-12.5, respectively), obesity (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.2-2.1), history of psychiatric illness (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.3-2.0), functional limitations (OR, 6.2; CI, 4.2-9.2), and stress urinary incontinence (OR, 5.0; CI, 3.0-8.3). Women who denied UUI at baseline were also likely to deny UUI at follow-up (OR, 47.4; CI, 22.9-98.1). CONCLUSIONS: : In this community-based population of women 50 years or older, UUI incidence was low and remission was high. Predictors of UUI included increased age, severe obesity, functional limitations, a positive psychiatric history, and incontinence status at baseline.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".