Evidence-Informed, Interdisciplinary, Multidimensional Action Plan to Advance Overactive Bladder Research and Treatment Initiatives: Directives From State-of-the-Science Conference on Overactive Bladder and Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This article outlines an evidence-informed, interdisciplinary, multidimensional, comprehensive action plan for the American Urogynecologic Society to improve care of women with overactive bladder (OAB) while minimizing treatment-related adverse events, including cognitive impairment. It is a "call to action" to advance basic, translational, and clinical research and summarizes initiatives developed at the State-of-the-Science Conference on OAB and Cognitive Impairment to (1) develop framework for a new OAB treatment approach in women, (2) define research gaps and future research priorities, (3) champion health equity and diversity considerations in OAB treatment, (4) foster community and promote education to remove stigma surrounding OAB and urinary incontinence, and (5) elevate visibility and impact of OAB, by creating partnerships through education and engagement with health care professionals, industry, private and public payers, funding agencies, and policymakers.
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 | 0.286 | 0.241 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| Research integrity | 0.047 | 0.073 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".