The Effect of Nocturia on Sleep Quality in Patients with Benign Prostatic Obstruction and Their Female Partners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Previous studies showed that nocturia has a negative effect on patients' sleep quality.However, studies that focused on the sleep quality of patients' partners are limited.In this study, we evaluated the impact of nocturia on sleep quality in patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) and their female partners. Materials and Methods:We included 50 BPO patients with nocturia (group 1), 50 patients without nocturia (group 2) and their female partners.Lower urinary tract symptoms of the patients were evaluated by international prostate symptom score, serum prostate-specific antigen, uroflowmetry and urinary ultrasonography.The sleep quality of the patients and their partners were assessed by Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI).The demographic and evaluation outcomes of the participants were recorded.Results: The mean age of the patients and their partners were 63±7.9 and 57.4±8.5 years, respectively, with no statistical significance.The patients and their partners in group 1 had significantly higher global PSQI compared with those in group 2. The percentage of poor sleep in patients and partners in group 1 was higher than that in group 2. Conclusion: Nocturia negatively affects the sleep quality of patients with BPO and their partners.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".