Scoping review of neurogenic bladder patient‐reported readiness and experience following care in a transitional urology clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To generate a scoping review that summarizes thematically on all reported patient perceptions on readiness and experiences during transitional urologic care for patients with neurogenic bladder and or congenital genitourinary conditions that require continuity of care into adulthood. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in October 2021. Records were screened and identified for studies relevant to reported readiness and experience in urologic transitional care among patients needing life-long urologic care. The methodological quality of the cross-sectional studies was assessed using AXIS. The included studies were clustered according to patient readiness in transition and patient experience-satisfaction in the urologic transition process. This scoping review was part of a systematic review registered on PROSPERO CRD42022306229 and was conducted in compliance with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. RESULTS: A total of 12 articles were included that assessed patients with neurogenic bladder that reported either readiness or patient experience following the transitional care process. The patient readiness was assessed in six studies, determined using the TRAQ score with a range of 3-4/5. Older age, high health literacy, and parental or families' transition process awareness were associated with readiness. Generally, patients experience better satisfaction with pediatric care than with adult care facilities. Most patients felt that sexuality and fertility were not adequately tackled during the transition. The reported barriers to successful transition were patient, provider, and system factors, including lack of insurance coverage/financial management, patient preference, long-term bond with the pediatric providers, and communication by the adult provider. Based on AXIS, all of the studies identified for this scoping review did not determine the sample size, and most of the studies did not categorize the responders, which could introduce bias to the interpretation of their results. CONCLUSION: This scoping review summarizes the readiness and experience of neurogenic bladder patients who underwent the urologic transitional process. Overall, understanding the patient, provider, and system factors associated with better readiness and enhancing the patient experience will ensure a better transition process.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".