Current trends in the evaluation and management of female urinary incontinence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite its common occurrence and often seemingly obvious causes, female urinary incontinence requires a thorough and thoughtful evaluation for its proper diagnosis and treatment. With rare exceptions, urinary incontinence is the result of failure of the sphincter mechanism to resist bladder pressures encountered during daily activities. This may be the result of sphincter failure, overactivity of the bladder detrusor muscle or both. In uncomplicated cases, the diagnosis is usually based on an evaluation in the office. Urodynamic and cystoscopic study may be helpful in complex, resistant and recurring cases of urinary incontinence of any cause. Most cases of incontinence may be classified as stress, urge or mixed urinary incontinence. Treatment of stress urinary incontinence focuses on supplementing the urethral continence mechanisms, particularly the urethral supports and periurethral striated muscle function. The current paradigm for the treatment of urge incontinence centres on pharmacologic therapy, primarily by correcting detrusor overactivity with antimuscarinic drugs. Other therapies aimed at altering sensorimotor function may be used in resistant cases. The treatment of mixed urinary incontinence requires consideration of the contribution of each of its components. With proper diagnosis, effective treatment is possible for most patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".