MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124746871 · doi:10.1177/105477380000900205

The Impact of Information on Health Behaviors of Older Adults with Urinary Incontinence

2000· article· en· W2124746871 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nursing Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary incontinenceIntervention (counseling)MedicinePreferenceRandomized controlled trialGerontologyPhysical therapyFamily medicineNursingUrologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of education about urinary incontinence on the subsequent help-seeking behaviors of older adults. Forty-five community-dwelling seniors were randomized to two groups. One group received individualized instruction supported by written information, the other received written information alone. All participants received a list of local health care professionals specializing in the assessment and treatment of urinary incontinence. Seventeen participants sought professional help following the intervention; however, there was no significant difference in help-seeking behaviors between intervention groups, chi2 = 1.42, alpha = 0.05. The most common reasonfor lack of help-seeking postintervention was a preference for self-care. Eighty-eight percent of those who initiated self-help behaviors reported a subjective improvement in the frequency or volume of their incontinence. Results emphasize the important role registered nurses should play in the dissemination of complete and accurate information about 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.440 · 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