MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315490212 · doi:10.3233/prm-210105

Examination of posture and balance in children with primary monosymptomatic nocturnal enuresis

2023· article· en· W4315490212 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Büşra İnal, Nuriye Özengın, Yeşim Bakar, Handan Ankaralı, Yusuf Öztürk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBalance (ability)EnuresisDynamic balancePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance problemsPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine symptom severity, posture, and balance of children with primary monosymptomatic nocturnal enuresis (PMNE) and compare to a healthy control group. METHODS: Thirty-five children with PMNE and 34 healthy children were included in this study. Physical and sociodemographic characteristics of the children were recorded. Symptom severity was assessed with a Vancouver Non-Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Dysfunctional Elimination Syndrome Questionnaire (NLUTD/DES), a four-day bladder diary and a seven-day bowel diary. Standing postural alignment was assessed with the Spinal Mouse device, and the sensory integration of static balance and dynamic standing balance was assessed with the Biodex Balance System SD. RESULTS: Compared to healthy controls, children with PMNE demonstrated increased symptom severity (p = 0.001), increased upright lumbar lordosis (p = 0.018) and sacral-hip angles (p = 0.029), decreased static balance in the sensory condition of unstable surface with eyes closed (p = 0.001), and decreased mediolateral dynamic balance (p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Children with PMNE demonstrate altered postural alignment, static and dynamic postural instability, and greater symptom severity on the Vancouver NLUTD/DES than age-matched controls.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207