Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide a review of the natural history, evaluation and management of men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Current literature and guidelines related to BPH were reviewed. RESULTS: The natural history of symptomatic BPH is variable and unpredictable. Initial symptom severity relates to the need for treatment while severity of symptoms, increased age, prostate size and decreased peak flow rate predict an increased incidence of urinary retention. Guidelines for the evaluation of men with LUTS have been developed but there is considerable variation in the extent of investigation among urologists. Complications secondary to BPH are uncommon and treatment decisions relate to improvement in quality of life. Drug therapy usually with an alpha blocker is generally the first treatment choice but for many men with minimal symptoms watchful waiting is an appropriate option. While a number of "less invasive" therapies have been extensively investigated and reported, they have not been widely adopted. Contemporary TURP has become a safer procedure with minimal hospital stay and remains, for many urologists, the interventional treatment of choice. CONCLUSION: BPH is a disease which impacts mainly on quality of life. Patients need to consider the benefits and harms of the treatment options. Treatment will depend on the availability of these treatments and on patient and physician preference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".