Do we assess urethral function adequately in LUTD and NLUTD? ICI‐RS 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Urethral function, as well as anatomy, play a significant role in voiding reflex and abnormalities in one or both contribute to the pathophysiology of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction (LUTD). We have several diagnostic tools to assess the urethral function or dysfunction but the question remains, are these adequate? METHODS: This is a report of the proceedings of Think Tank P1: 'Do we assess urethral function adequately in LUTD and NLUTD?' from the annual International Consultation on Incontinence-Research Society, which took place September 22-24, 2014 in Bristol, UK. RESULTS: We have collected and discussed, as a committee, the evidence with regard to the urethra and the available relevant methods of testing urethral function, with the emphasis on female and male voiding dysfunction. We looked into previous research and clinical studies and compiled summaries of pertinent testing related to urethral function. The discussion has focused on clinical applications and the desirability of further development of functional tests and analyses in this field. CONCLUSIONS: There are limitations to most of the urethral function tests. Future perspectives and research should concentrate on further development of functional testing and imaging techniques with emphasis on standardization and clinical application of these tests. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:935-942, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".