MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915893311 · doi:10.1002/nau.23939

International Continence Society consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of nocturia

2019· article· en· W2915893311 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurourology and Urodynamics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustUniversiteit GentUniversitair Ziekenhuis GentUniversitair Medisch Centrum UtrechtUniversiteit MaastrichtAin Shams UniversityMaastricht Universitair Medisch CentrumRijksuniversiteit GroningenUniversity of BristolSchool of Medicine, Emory UniversityState University of New YorkEmory UniversityUniversity of AlbertaSUNY Downstate Medical CenterVanderbilt University Medical CenterVanderbilt University
KeywordsMedicineNocturiaDesmopressinUrinary incontinenceLower urinary tract symptomsIntensive care medicineInternal medicineUrologyGynecologyUrinary systemProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patients with nocturia have to face many hurdles before being diagnosed and treated properly. The aim of this paper is to: summarize the nocturia patient pathway, explore how nocturia is diagnosed and treated in the real world and use the Delphi method to develop a practical algorithm with a focus on what steps need to be taken before prescribing desmopressin. METHODS: Evidence comes from existing guidelines (Google, PubMed), International Consultation on Incontinence-Research Society (ICI-RS) 2017, prescribing information and a Delphi panel (3 rounds). The International Continence Society initiated this study, the authors represent the ICI-RS, European Association of Urology, and Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU). RESULTS: Diagnostic packages: consensus on, history taking for all causalities, intake diary (fluid, food) and bladder diary, not for its duration. Pelvic (women) or rectal (men) examination, prostate-specific antigen, serum sodium check (SSC), renal function, endocrine screening: when judged necessary. Timing or empty stomach when SSC is not important. Therapeutic packages: the safe candidates for desmopressin can be phenotyped as no polydipsia, heart/kidney failure, severe leg edema or obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Lifestyle interventions may be useful. Initiating desmopressin: risk management consensus on three clinical pictures. Follow-up of desmopressin therapy: there was consensus on SSC day 3 to 7, and at 1 month. Stop therapy if SSC is <130 mmol/L regardless of symptoms. Stop if SSC is 130 to 135 mmol/L with symptoms of hyponatremia. CONCLUSION: A summary of the nocturia patient pathway across different medical specialists is useful in the visualization and phenotyping of patients for diagnosis and therapy. By summarizing basic knowledge of desmopressin, we aim to ease its initiation and shorten the patient journey for nocturia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it