Bibliographic record
Abstract
The surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has evolved over the past century, using various techniques of retropubic colposuspensions and sling procedures. In the past two decades, the sling has become the mainstay of surgical treatment of SUI, with the synthetic midurethral sling (MUS) leading the way. With the recent concerns raised by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada about the safety of vaginal surgery using mesh implants, including the MUS, urologists and gynecologists should be familiar with suitable alternatives, including the pubovaginal sling (PVS), which often incorporates autologous fascia. Surgeons should be expected to discuss the surgical options to patients in more detail so that an informed decision can be made by both parties on which surgery to choose. Despite the MUS still being considered the "gold standard" by many, both the urologist and gynecologist who manage SUI should understand the indications for a PVS with autologous fascia, as well as its surgical technique and outcomes. This knowledge is required to aid in the decision-making of both the patient and her surgeon. In this article, the role of the PVS and the description of its surgical technique are presented.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".