MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052007827 · doi:10.1155/2005/406262

Clinical NIRS of the urinary bladder – A demonstration case report

2005· article· en· W2052007827 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Macnab, R. Gagnon, Lynn Stothers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Spectroscopy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrinary incontinenceUrologyGold standard (test)Urinary systemUrinary bladderUrinationAbdomenSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urinary incontinence is a common affliction among people of all ages throughout the world. There are many causes of incontinence, treatment options are determined by the cause, and current diagnostic methods require urodynamic assessment, which involves urethral and rectal catheterization, which are uncomfortable and distasteful for patients. Since clinical near infrared spectrophotometry (NIRS) is a non‐invasive, rapid means of measuring tissue oxygenation status at the bedside, we examined whether NIRS could be useful as a diagnostic tool for bladder dysfunction. An adult patient attending an incontinence clinic for routine urodynamic testing also had NIRS data collection during the standard bladder filling regimen. NIRS optodes were placed on the skin of the intact abdomen over the supra pubic region. Changes in oxy and de‐oxy hemoglobin concentration and changes in cytochrome c oxidase net redox status via NIRS were collected at 6 Hz. The magnitudes of change that occurred during NIRS data collection are on the order of 0.5 µmol/l and the moments of change correspond to the subject′s reported sensations of bladder filling and emptying, and with conventional urodynamics. These observations suggest that NIRS may be a disruptive technology with a role to play in non‐invasive evaluation of bladder dysfunction in humans.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of SpectroscopySame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207