MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FAILURE OF A MONOTHERAPY STRATEGY FOR DIFFICULT CHRONIC PROSTATITIS/CHRONIC PELVIC PAIN SYNDROME

2004· article· en· W2029270641 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstatitisPelvic painQuality of life (healthcare)Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndromeChronic bacterial prostatitisPhysical examinationPhysical therapyInternal medicineSurgeryUrologyProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We determined the effect of a best evidence based monotherapeutic strategy for patients diagnosed with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) referred to a specialized prostatitis clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with CP/CPPS referred by urologists after failure of prescribed therapy for evaluation and treatment at Queen's University prostatitis research clinic were extensively evaluated, aggressively treated following a standardized treatment algorithm and followed for 1 year using a validated prostatitis specific symptom and quality of life instrument, the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI). All patients underwent a standardized protocol for CP/CPPS including a history, physical examination, standard 4-glass test, plus urethral swab and semen for microscopy and culture, uroflowmetry and residual urine determination. Treatment followed a best evidence based strategy with a standardized monotherapy based algorithm. RESULTS: A total of 100 consecutive patients with CP/CPPS (average age 42.2 years, range 20 to 70 and average symptom duration 6.5 years, range 0.5 to 39) had 1-year followup after initial evaluation. Patients were prescribed treatment based on documentation of "failed," "successful" and "never tried" therapies based on a standardized treatment algorithm. Patients treated successfully were continued on the prescribed therapy, while therapy was discontinued and new therapy instituted (based on algorithm) in those in whom the initially prescribed therapy failed. At 1 year there was a statistically significant decrease in total NIH-CPSI (23.3 to 19.5, p = 0.0004), pain (11.0 to 9.4, p = 0.03) and quality of life (7.7 to 6.1, p <0.001), but not voiding (4.6 to 4.0, p = 0.12). A perceptible 25% decrease in total NIH-CPSI symptom score was noted in 37% and the greatest improvement was in the quality of life domain (43% of patients had greater than 25% improvement in quality of life). Of the patients 35% had a significant decrease of greater than 6 points in total NIH-CPSI. A clear, clinically significant improvement in total NIH-CPSI (greater than 50% decrease) was noted in 19%. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately a third of patients with treatment refractory CP/CPPS undergoing extensive evaluation and therapy based on a sequential monotherapy treatment strategy in a specialized prostatitis clinic had at least modest improvement in symptoms during 1 year. This study confirms that a treatment strategy based on the sequential application of monotherapies for patients with a long history of severe CP/CPPS remains relatively poor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.285 · 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