An integrative review of standardized clinical evaluation tool utilization in anticholinergic drug trials for neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: To review prospective and randomized trials studying anticholinergic therapy for neurogenic bladder in SCI to identify whether trials included standardized clinical evaluation tools and reporting measures now recognized to enhance clinical trial data. METHODS: A systematic search via EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), HTA (Health Technology Assessment), CMR (Comprehensive Microbial Resource), HAPI (Health and Psychosocial Instruments) and PsycINFO using the key term spinal cord injury crossed with oxybutynin, tolterodine, darifenacin, solifenacin, fesoterodine, trospium chloride, propiverine, propantheline and anticholinergic(s) for 1946-2015 inclusive. We then collated whether standardized clinical tools, measures and descriptors were used within each study identified: American Spine Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale; symptom scores validated in SCI; technical methodology for urodynamics/video urodynamics; urinary diaries; and standardized urologic terminology. RESULTS: A total of 1225 entries with 610 unique articles were identified, 14 randomized and 16 prospective studies. In 6/30 the population comprised SCI patients with neurogenic bladder alone; the remainder included mixed neurogenic etiologies. Classification using the ASIA impairment scale was used in <10% of studies; none used symptom scores validated in SCI; <50% reported urodynamic test methodology fully, incorporated urinary diaries or used International Continence Society Standardization Subcommittee urinary tract terminology. CONCLUSION: Integrative review of trials from 1946 to 2015 identified infrequent use of standardized clinical evaluation tools and reporting measures. Data from future trials evaluating therapies for neurogenic bladder would likely be more applicable to specific SCI patients if current standardized classification and descriptors now available were used consistently: for example, the ASIA scale, symptom scores validated in SCI, standardized urodynamic methodology, urinary diaries and urinary tract terminology. Studies recruiting SCI patients exclusively would also provide additional benefit.
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 | 0.046 | 0.169 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.037 | 0.035 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".