New-Onset Fecal Incontinence After Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fecal incontinence (FI) is a common complication after stroke, yet epidemiological research into this distressing condition is limited. The purpose of this study was to describe the prevalence, natural history, associations, and impact of new-onset FI after stroke. METHODS: Stroke patients in the community-based South London Stroke Register (January 1995 to 2000) without preexisting FI were characterized regarding bowel continence at 7 to 10 days, 3 months, and 1 and 3 years after stroke. FI was defined as any degree of bowel leakage. RESULTS: Prevalence of poststroke FI was 30% (7 to 10 days), 11% (3 months), 11% (1 year), and 15% (3 years). One third of patients with FI at 3 months were continent by 1 year; conversely, 63% incontinent at 1 year had been continent at 3 months. Characteristics of 91 patients with FI and 755 without FI at 3 months were compared using multiple logistic regression. Acute stroke associations of neglect (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% CI, 1.0 to 3.5) and initial urinary incontinence (OR, 6.2; 95% CI, 3.2 to 11.9) were no longer significant after adjustment for clinical factors at 3 months. Final independent associations were anticholinergic drug use (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 10.2) and needing help with toilet use (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.4 to 17.3). FI at 3 months increased the risk of long-term placement (28% vs 6%) and death within 1 year (20% vs 8%). CONCLUSIONS: New-onset FI in stroke survivors is common but may be transient. Modifiable risk factors for FI 3 months after stroke are constipating drug use and difficulty with toilet access, raising implications for developing treatment and prevention strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".