Smoking and Bladder Symptoms in Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relation of smoking status and smoking intensity with bladder symptoms. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to 3,000 women (aged 18-79 years) randomly identified from the Finnish Population Register. Case definitions for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urgency, and urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) were "often" or "always" based on reported occurrence (never, rarely, often, always). Case definitions for urinary frequency were based on reporting of longest voiding interval as less than 2 hours and for nocturia reporting of at least two voids per night. Potential confounders included comorbidities, medications, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and reproductive factors. RESULTS: Responses totaled 2,002 (67.0%). Frequency was reported by 7.1%, nocturia 12.6%, SUI 11.2%, urgency 9.7%, and UUI 3.1%. In the multivariable analyses, smoking was associated with urgency (odds ratio [OR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-4.2 for current and OR 1.8, CI 1.2-2.9 for former compared with never smokers) and frequency (OR 3.0, CI 1.8-5.0 for current and OR 1.7, CI 1.0-3.1 for former smokers) but not with nocturia and SUI. Adjusted prevalence differences between never and current smokers were 6.0% (3.0-9.1%) for urgency and 6.0% (3.3-8.7%) for frequency. Similarly, current heavy (compared with light) smoking was associated with additional risk of urgency (OR 2.1, CI 1.1-3.9) and frequency (OR 2.2, CI 1.2-4.3). CONCLUSION: Urgency and frequency are approximately three times more common among current than never smokers. Parallel associations for urgency and frequency with smoking intensity suggest a dose-response relationship. Nocturia and SUI are not associated with smoking. These results suggest an additional rationale for smoking cessation in women seeking medical attention for bladder symptoms and highlight the diversity between such symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".