New pharmacological approaches against chronic bowel and bladder problems in paralytics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) leads generally to an irreversible loss of sensory functions and voluntary motor control below injury level. Cures that could repair SCI and/or restore voluntary walking have not been yet developed nor commercialized. Beyond the well-known loss of walking capabilities, most SCI patients experience also a plethora of motor problems and health concerns including specific bladder and bowel dysfunctions. Indeed, chronic constipation and urinary retention, two significant life-threatening complications, are typically found in patients suffering of traumatic (e.g., falls or car accidents) or non-traumatic SCI (e.g., multiple sclerosis, spinal tumors). Secondary health concerns associated with these dysfunctions include hemorrhoids, abdominal distention, altered visceral sensitivity, hydronephrosis, kidney failure, urinary tract infections, sepsis and, in some cases, cardiac arrest. Consequently, individuals with chronic SCI are forced to regularly seek emergency and critical care treatments when some of these conditions occur or become intolerable. Increasing evidence supports the existence of a novel experimental approach that may be capable of preventing the occurrence or severity of bladder and bowel problems. Indeed, recent findings in animal models of SCI have revealed that, despite paraplegia or tetraplegia, it remains possible to elicit episodes of micturition and defecation by acting pharmacologically or electrically upon specialized lumbosacral neuronal networks, namely the spinal or sacral micturition center (SMC) and lumbosacral defecation center (LDC). Daily activation of SMC and LDC neurons could potentially become, new classes of minimally invasive treatments (i.e., if orally active) against these dysfunctions and their many life-threatening complications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".