Urogynecological conditions associated with overactive bladder symptoms in women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Overactive bladder symptoms (OAB) affect 9-43% of women and are associated with underlying disorders, including pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The aim of this study is to identify urogynecological conditions associated with OAB symptoms. METHODS: This prospective, institutional review board-approved study included women referred to a tertiary centre with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). All women completed the self-administered OAB questionnaire (OABSS). Those with an OABSS ≥8, the cutoff, were considered to have OAB symptoms. Patients underwent a history and physical examination (including Baden-Walker prolapse grading and stress test), 24-hour voiding diary, pad test (for urinary incontinence), urinalysis, and uroflow with post-void residual volume. Patients were classified clinically into the following: idiopathic OAB, SUI, POP, bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) neurogenic bladder (NGB), recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), and miscellaneous. RESULTS: In total, 148 women met the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 67 years. Only 27% had no comorbid conditions and were considered idiopathic OAB. Associated urogynecological conditions included SUI in 37%, POP in 26%, miscellaneous conditions in 18%, recurrent UTI in 11%, NGB in 9%, and BOO in 8%. Some patients met criteria for more than one category, thus the total is greater than 100%. CONCLUSIONS: In a tertiary care setting, a significant proportion of women with OAB symptoms have underlying conditions that may cause or contribute to their symptoms. Appropriate evaluation is desirable to enhance our understanding of the relationship of these conditions to the diagnosis, treatment, outcomes, and pathophysiology of OAB.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".