MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2412471318

Management of benign prostatic hyperplasia by the primary care physician in the 21st century: the new paradigm.

2008· article· en· W2412471318 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Barkin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLower urinary tract symptomsHyperplasiaUrologyProstateProstate cancerTransurethral resection of the prostatePrimary care physicianBenign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)DiseaseGynecologyInternal medicinePrimary careCancerFamily medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the commonest causes of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men over age 50. Fifty percent of men over age 50 will require some type of management for BPH/LUTS symptoms. Until about 15 years ago, the most common management for BPH was a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) operation. Initially, once a diagnosis of BPH has been made, most men are treated medically. One must first rule out other serious causes of these symptoms, such as prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and other obstructions. For men with an enlarged prostate, there is a good chance that therapy with a 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) can prevent disease progression and the need for surgery. There has been a lot of recent work on different combination therapies for the treatment of BPH/LUTS. If a patient's serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level is greater than 1.5 ng/ml and his prostate volume is greater than 30 cc and he has significant LUTS, then combination medical therapy of an alpha blocker with a 5-ARI is the most effective therapy. After a careful workup, it is quite reasonable and appropriate for the primary care physician to initiate this therapy for a patient with BPH/LUTS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207