Sexual Function in Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence Treated with the SPARC Sling System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the impact of SPARC on female sexual function. METHODS: 151 women with a mean age of 60 ± 11.90 and SUI had a complete urodynamic investigation and underwent SPARC operation. 98 women completed the validated female sexual function index questionnaire (FSFI) at baseline and 94 women at follow-up. A minimum follow-up of 12 months was required for study inclusion. RESULTS: 52/98 women were sexually active at baseline. Postoperatively only 33 patients were sexually active. The FSFI score of all 33 pre- and postoperative sexually active women increased from 25.3 ± 5.7 at baseline to 27.4 ± 4.8 at follow-up (P = 0.1). Scores of women with reduced sexual function at baseline increased significantly in the domains desire, arousal, and lubrication as well as orgasm and satisfaction and total FSFI-score (P = 0.002) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the SPARC-sling procedure for SUI did not negatively interfere with female sexual function.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".