Research priorities for urological care following spinal cord injury: recommendations of an expert panel.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A multidisciplinary panel of experts from Canada and the United States was convened by the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (ONF) to establish research priorities in the area of urological care following spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: The panel reviewed a synthesis of published literature in five areas of urology, identified emerging opportunities in the private and public sector, and used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on priorities for funding. RESULTS: The panel recommendations included: clinical trials of the safety and efficacy of M3 receptor specific anti-muscarinic agents for bladder hyperactivity in SCI patients; development and testing of protocols for sacral nerve electrostimulation without sacral afferent neurectomy for management of micturition - including selective stimulation of sacral nerve fibers, high frequency blocking of the pudendal nerve to minimize the risk of urethral sphincter co-contraction and genital nerve stimulation for bladder inhibition and incontinence management; clinical trials of the efficacy and safety of intra-urethral valve catheters; trials of the efficacy of probiotics for bacterial interference i.e. to reduce colonization by uropathogens and manage the dual problems of infection and pathogen resistance to anti-microbials: innovations in the prevention or treatment of stone disease (ureteral, bladder and kidney). CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations form the strategic priorities of the ONF SCI grants program for Ontario-based investigators and their partnerships with out-of-province collaborators and organizations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".