Strong Impact of Nocturia on Sleep Quality in Patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Nocturia is a bothersome symptom that impacts sleep quality in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study was performed to evaluate the impact of nocturia on sleep quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 58 male patients with LUTS/BPH were enrolled. LUTS/BPH patients without nocturia were included in the control group. The inclusion criteria were eight or more points on the International Prostate System Score (IPSS) including more than one episode of nocturia and a prostate volume larger than 20 ml. IPSS, prostate volume, uroflowmetry, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) from each patient were recorded. RESULTS: Patients with nocturia showed a higher mean global PSQI (8.5±0.4) than patients without nocturia (4.82±0.4) (p<0.01). Patients with nocturia showed a higher percentage of severe sleep disorders (74.1%) than patients without nocturia (35.3%) (p<0.01). The regression coefficient between the number of episodes of nocturia and mean global PSQI was 0.42 (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with nocturia showed poor sleep quality, and this was related to the number of episodes of nocturia. This suggests that nocturia has a strong impact on sleep quality in patients with LUTS/BPH.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".