A 10-Year Follow-Up of Urinary and Fecal Incontinence among the Oldest Old in the Community: The Canadian Study of Health and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary incontinence is common in the elderly. The epidemiology of fecal and double (urinary and fecal) incontinence is less known. The Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) is a national study of elderly living in the community at baseline (n = 8,949) and interviewed in 1991-1992, 1996, and 2001. Using data from the CSHA, we report the prevalence of urinary, fecal, and double incontinence in each wave and the cumulative incidence between waves and investigate the predictors of urinary and fecal incontinence. Urinary incontinence increased rapidly in old age, being almost twice as high in women as in men. Fecal and double incontinence were less common, but also increased rapidly with age. In women, parity showed a positive relationship with (prevalent) urinary incontinence. In men, diabetes was a risk factor for urinary and fecal incontinence. We conclude that urinary, fecal, and double incontinence increase rapidly with age and that inquiry about incontinence should be part of routine medical and nursing assessment of all elderly.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".