Association of stone surgery with patient‐reported complications after spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine if a history of urinary stone surgery in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) is associated with an increased incidence of SCI-related complications and lower quality of life (QOL). METHODS: The Neurogenic Bladder Research Group (NBRG) registry is a multicenter, prospective, observational study which measures QOL after acquired SCI. Over 1.5 years, 1479 participants were enrolled and grouped according to history of stone surgery. We evaluated SCI-related complications, QOL, and associations between patient factors and prior stone surgery using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Participants were a median of 11 years post-SCI and 189 (12.8%) reported prior bladder or kidney stone surgery; 95.8% of these occurred after the SCI. Median time between SCI and first stone was 5.6 years (IQR: 1.8-12.8). Hospitalizations were higher for those with prior stone surgery, with common reasons including UTIs, blood clots, pressure ulcers, and pneumonia (p < 0.001). During the year of observation, the incidence of stone surgery was 17% in those with a prior history of stone surgery and 2% per year in those without prior stone surgery (p < 0.001). Controlling for covariates, bladder management strategy, age, BMI, and years since SCI were associated with history of stone surgery. CONCLUSIONS: People with SCI and a history of surgical stone disease are at high risk for episodes of recurrent stones and increased hospitalizations, particularly those with kidney stones and indwelling catheter use. Identification of high-risk patients may guide tailored surveillance for complications and stone prevention strategies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".