The relationship between urethral sphincter mechanism incompetency and lower back pain: positing a novel treatment for urinary incontinence in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In humans, multiple researchers have not only determined that there is a relationship between urinary incontinence (UI) and lower back pain (LBP), but that by treating the LBP, clinicians are able to improve or resolve the UI. Up until now, no equivalent canine research has investigated whether treatment of LBP can improve the clinical signs of acquired, non-neurologic UI in dogs. Aim: To determine if a relationship exists between LBP and urethral sphincter mechanism incompetence (USMI) in dogs. Methods: Review of medical records of all patients that presented to Points East West Veterinary Services with a history of naturally occurring acquired UI from May 2013 to December 2019. Thirty-nine patients treated for LBP using combined acupuncture and manual therapy, and 33/39 patients that also received concurrent photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy, qualified for this study. Results: < 0.01) of UI episodes. Treatment responses ranged from no improvement, to complete resolution of the USMI clinical signs. Conclusion: The reduction of USMI clinical signs following LBP treatment suggests a relationship between these two conditions. Combined acupuncture, manual therapy, with or without PBM was shown to be an effective treatment for USMI. By corollary, USMI incontinence should be considered a potential pain symptom.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".