Occupational Therapy Interventions for Urinary Dysfunction in Primary Care: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary dysfunction is commonly reported in primary care contexts. A shortage of primary care providers is affecting access to relevant services. Occupational therapy practitioners work in primary care settings and typically address urinary dysfunction in an outpatient context. Evidence regarding the delivery of occupational therapy interventions for urinary dysfunction in primary care has been limited. In this study, 3 women received 9-14 occupational therapy sessions in a primary care setting to address urinary symptoms. Plan-of-care duration, assessments, and urinary dysfunction interventions were individualized to accommodate personal and environmental factors. Across all case-series participants, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure scores demonstrated clinically significant improvement. Mixed results were found for SF-36 health-related quality-of-life subscale scores. Assessment scores specific to urinary dysfunction decreased, indicating reduced symptom severity and functional impact. This article provides preliminary evidence regarding the feasibility of occupational therapy interventions addressing urinary dysfunction in primary care settings.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".