Exercise and Urinary Incontinence in Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary incontinence is a common problem in women and may significantly impair their quality of life. Although women often report stress urinary incontinence during exercise, current data indicates that most types of exercise are not a risk factor for the development of urinary incontinence. However, certain extreme high-impact sports such as parachute jumping may cause pelvic organ support defects that result in stress urinary incontinence. Eating disorders also increase the risk of urinary incontinence in athletes. Overall, women should be encouraged to pursue physical activity that will benefit their general health without the risk of development of urinary incontinence later in life. Women athletes should be counseled about the increased risk of urinary incontinence with ultra high-impact sports and eating disorders. Target Audience: Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Practitioners Learning Objectives: After completion of this article, the reader should be able to list the most common types of urinary incontinence, to outline the risk factors for the development of urinary incontinence, and to describe the pathogenesis of exercise-associated urinary incontinence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".