Relationship between Body Mass Index and Overactive Bladder in Women and Correlations with Urodynamic Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a common condition. In women, studies have shown that the prevalence of OAB is positively related to increasing body mass index (BMI). Our objective was to define a relationship between BMI and OAB through correlation with urodynamic study (UDS). METHODS: A prospective study was conducted. Ambulatory women aged 18 years or older who had symptoms of OAB for at least 3 months were enrolled. Patients answered a questionnaire, had their weight and height recorded, and underwent UDS. Patients were categorized into 3 groups as follows: group 1, BMI<25; group 2, BMI 25 to 29.9; and group 3, BMI≥30. RESULTS: A total of 113 patients were examined (group 1, n=32; group 2, n=40; group 3, n=41). The patients' mean ages were 50, 55, and 59 years for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P<0.05). Group 3 showed a significant increase in the incidence of subjective mixed leakage and the number of pads used compared with groups 1 and 2. No significant differences were seen among the groups in duration of symptoms, OAB V-8 score, or the incidence of subjective urgency or stress leakage. The UDS parameters of groups 1, 2, and 3 showed no statistically significant differences for most variables. Group 3 showed a significant increase in the incidence of urge leakage by UDS compared with group 2 only. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing BMI was age related. A BMI≥30 showed a higher incidence of subjective urinary mixed leakage and pad use. UDS showed no significant correlation between OAB and any BMI category for most UDS parameters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".