Urodynamic findings in patients with nocturia and their associations with patient characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study identified associations between lower urinary tract pathology confirmed on urodynamic testing, baseline characteristics, and symptoms for adults with nocturia. Nocturia frequency was examined for predictors. METHODS: This retrospective study from 2012-2019 analyzed adult patients with nocturia (waking to void ≥2x/night) referred for urodynamic testing (UDS). Data on baseline characteristics, symptoms, UDS parameters, and lower urinary tract pathology were recorded. Males and females were analyzed separately, and univariable analyses were conducted, stratified by lower urinary tract pathology. Multivariable regression models were fit. Nocturia frequency was analyzed for associations with clinical parameters. RESULTS: Altogether, 372 patients were included (159 men and 213 women). More men had detrusor overactivity (DO) (p<0.001) and bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) (p<0.001). DO was associated with storage symptoms (odds ratio [OR] 5.19, p<0.001), in addition to older age (p=0.009) and being male (p<0.001). Detrusor under-activity (DU) was associated with voiding symptoms (OR 1.92, p=0.004), older age (p<0.001), and being female (p=0.018). BOO was associated voiding symptoms (OR 2.09, p=0.023), younger age (p=0.018), and being male (p<0.001). The quantity of lower urinary tract symptoms was associated with DU and DO. Nocturia frequency was not associated with baseline variables or underlying pathologies. A substantial number of patients were diagnosed with DU alone (n=69, 18.7%) or associated with other diagnoses (n=108, 29.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Careful assessment of risk factors and symptoms may help identify underlying lower urinary tract pathology for adults with nocturia. DU is found in a significant proportion of patients with nocturia, a previously under-reported result.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".