International Continence Society best practice statement for use of sacral neuromodulation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an accepted therapy for a variety of conditions. However, despite over 20 years of experience, it remains a specialized procedure with a number of subtleties. Here we present the recommendations issued from the International Continence Society (ICS) SNM Consensus Panel. METHODS: Under the auspices of the ICS, eight urologists, three colorectal surgeons and two urogynecologists, covering a wide breadth of geographic and specialty interest representation, met in January 2017 to discuss best practices for neuromodulation. Suggestions for statements were submitted in advance and specific topics were assigned to committee members, who prepared and presented supporting data to the group, at which time each topic was discussed in depth. Best practice statements were formulated based on available data. This document was then circulated to multiple external reviewers after which final edits were made and approved by the group. RESULTS: The present recommendations, based on the most relevant data available in the literature, as well as expert opinion, address a variety of specific and at times problematic issues associated with SNM. These include the use of SNM for a variety of underlying conditions, need for pre-procedural testing, use of staged versus single-stage procedures, screening for success during the trial phase, ideal anesthesia, device implantation, post-procedural management, trouble-shooting loss of device function, and future directions for research. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines undoubtedly constitute a reference document, which will help urologists, gynecologists, and colorectal surgeons optimize their use of SNM for refractory urinary urgency and frequency, UUI, NOR, and FI.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it