Catheterization for treating neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction in patients with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review. A report from the Neuro‐Urology Promotion Committee of the International Continence Society (ICS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To systematically assess all available evidence on efficacy and safety of catheterization for treating neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies were identified by electronic search of Embase, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane register (last search March 3, 2018) and by screening of reference lists and reviews. RESULTS: After screening 7'015 articles, we included four studies (one prospective and two retrospective cohort studies, one retrospective cross-sectional study), in which a total of 445 patients were enrolled. No randomized controlled trial was available. Catheterization substantially increased quality of life, post void residual, and incontinence episodes in all included studies. Pooling of data for meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of reported outcomes. Adverse events were reported in two studies only. Risk of bias and confounding was intermediate. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary data suggests beneficial effects of catheterization on the urological outcome in patients with MS. However, although intermittent and indwelling catheterization is used frequently in daily clinical practice in the MS population, the evidence base is very limited and well-designed, properly sampled, and powered studies are urgently needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".