Neuropathic bladder and intermittent catheterization: social and psychological impact on children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes part of larger study involving 40 families of children and adolescents with neuropathic bladder looking at the psychosocial impact of catheterization on them and their families. This study focuses on their experiences of clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) and self‐catheterization (SC). Twenty‐eight children and adolescents (11 males, 17 females; mean age 9 years, SD 2 years 7 months, range 5 to 20 years) with neuropathic bladder (mostly with spina bifida)participated in a semi‐structured interview to explore their understanding of micturition and catheterization, and their views about the introduction and practical use of this technique. Participants were invited to draw self‐portraits and figure diagrams to depict their understanding of CIC and SC. Age‐appropriate self‐esteem measures (Harter Pictorial Scale of Perceived Competence, the Self‐Perception Profile, and the Culture‐Free Self‐Esteem Inventory) were administered to see if catheterization status affected emotional well‐being. In an extension of this study, children's experiences of SC were explored by a postal questionnaire to all children successfully using SC who were attending the Paediatric Neuropathic Bladder Clinic. Children aged < 5 years, those with learning difficulties, and those using indwelling catheters were excluded. From a total sample of 66 (31 females, 35 males), 52 parents and 42 children and adolescents (28 females and 14 males) responded. No significant difference was observed in self‐esteem for those successfully catheterizing. Specific challenges involved learning SC and practical use of the technique. Concerns were leakage and being wet, and peers finding out about their continence management. Implications for the education, problem solving, and support of families and young people to promote cooperation and optimal benefits from catheterization are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".