Preliminary evaluation of a new controlled-release oxybutynin in urinary incontinence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a preliminary evaluation of a new oral formulation of controlled-release (CR) oxybutynin tablet taken once-daily in patients with urinary urge incontinence. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A single-centre, open-label, 8-week study was conducted. Patients with urodynamically-confirmed detrusor instability, micturition frequency (>/= 8 voids/day) and/or urinary incontinence (>/= 2 incontinence periods/day) were enrolled. The study duration was 8 weeks: patients received IR oxybutynin (2.5-5 mg bid) for 2 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout/baseline period to avoid carryover effects, and oral CR oxybutynin (15 mg OD) for 4 weeks. Daily void frequency, fluid intake, urinary incontinence episodes, and spontaneously reported adverse events were recorded in a daily diary for five consecutive days in each treatment period. RESULTS: Of 12 enrolled patients, 9 patients efficacy; all patients were evaluable for safety. completed the study and were evaluable for Compared to baseline/washout, CR oxybutynin reduced UI episodes/day by 45% (p = 0.13) and micturitions/day by 15% (p = 0.07). Treatment with IR oxybutynin (mean dose: 6.7 +/- 2.5 mg/day) reduced UI episodes/day from baseline by 7% (p = 0.58) and voids/day by 6% (p = 0.29). Fluid intake remained consistent at approximately 2 litres/day during all study periods. The most common adverse event was dry mouth. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the reductions in daily frequency of incontinence and micturition following 4-weeks treatment, CR oxybutynin (15 mg OD) was at least as effective as the patients' previous dose of IR oxybutynin (mean dose: 6.7 +/- 2.5 mg/day). These improvements were achieved without restriction of fluid intake. Initial 15 mg doses of CR oxybutynin appear to be well tolerated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".