Abstracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: we have compared urodynamic studies (UD) with ultrasound (US) measurements for diagnosis and follow-up of patients with Non-Monosymptomatic Nocturnal Enuresis (NMNE).Methods: 738 enuretics children with daytime voiding symptoms have been subordinated to UD and to US bladder.The upper limits for US bladder wall thickness measurements are 3 and 5 mm (full and empty bladder).704 children (95,4%) have urodynamic signs of a overactive bladder and the US bladder wall measurements thickened.After a six-month antimuscarin treatment, we have repeated a new study with US and UD.Also after the first cycle of therapy we have confirmed relation between urodynamic and ultrasound measurements.Basing on this evidence, we have modified diagnostic management of patients with NMNE.In enuretics with daytime voiding symptoms and with significant US measurement (bladder wall thickness >3mm and >5mm to full and empty bladder respectively) diagnostic management is concluded.This new protocol has been applied to 296 patients with NMNE.After the first 6 months of therapy, a new US study has been performed in all patients.Results: we found that 224 patients (75,7%) were full-responders with normal detrusor thickness; 54 patients (18,2%) were partial responders but without normalization of detrusor thickness; only 18 patients (6,1%) were classified as non-responders with a persistence of a thickened bladder wall.Conclusions:.According to our experience US, which is non-invasive, is especially useful for diagnosis and follow-up of NMNE instead of UD, which is invasive and often traumatic for children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.536 | 0.361 |
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".