Treatment of daytime urinary incontinence: A standardization document from the International Children's Continence Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This article is a standardization document of the International Children's Continence Society (ICCS); it represent a consensus of ICCS on the management of pediatric daytime urine incontinence (DUI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This document was designed and written by a multi-disciplinary core group of authors appointed by the ICCS' board. RESULTS: Based on evidence of studies and the experience of experts, the treatment guideline of DUI is assembled in this standardization document. Guidelines and the algorithm of management include non-pharmacological treatment (urotherapy), as well as the pharmacological therapy and other modalities that are presented for DUI in general, as along with recommendations for individual conditions. CONCLUSION: The final document is not a systematic literature review. It includes relevant research when available as well as experts' opinion on the current understanding of daytime incontinence in children. This document illustrates that specific treatment of DUI based on an exact diagnosis is effective. The mainstay of treatment is urotherapy, but a combination of treatment modalities is often necessary. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:43-50, 2017. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".