Using conjoint analysis to measure the importance of psychosocial traits in the choices of bladder management after spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a conjoint analysis experiment to better understand the psychosocial priorities related to bladder management in individuals after spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: We developed a conjoint analysis survey that included 11 psychosocial attributes phrased in the context of bladder management (including attributes for urinary infections, and incontinence). We then performed a multi-center prospective cross-sectional study of adults with existing SCI which consisted of a baseline interview, followed by the online conjoint analysis survey (delivered through Sawtooth software). Hierarchical Bayes random effects regression analysis was used to determine the relative importance of the attributes. RESULTS: A total of 345 people complete the study. There was good representation of both men and women, and individuals with cervical and thoracic or lower lesions. The most important attribute was the frequency of urinary infections. Age, sex, and level of SCI were generally not related to the attributes measured in the study. In the subgroup of 256 patients who used a catheter for bladder management, significantly more importance was placed on urinary tract infections, time, fluid intake, and social life among indwelling catheter users compared to intermittent catheter users. CONCLUSIONS: Most bladder-related psychosocial priorities are not impacted by a patient's age, sex or level of SCI. Differences in psychosocial priorities between indwelling and intermittent catheter users may represent factors that should be focused on to optimize bladder management after SCI.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".