MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387341310 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8573

NS-AUA 2023 Annual Meeting Abstracts – Best Practice, Benign Disease

2023· article· en· W4387341310 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Editor CUAJ

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematological disorders and diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Effective analgesia for patients undergoing intravesical botulinum toxin (BoNT) is not well-studied.Pre-procedural bladder instillation of lidocaine solution remains standard practice but does require significant time and resources.The primary objective of this study is to compare pain scores immediately following intravesical BoNT using pre-procedural intravesical lidocaine instillations and lidocaine gel vs lidocaine lubricating gel alone.Methods: All patients with intact bladder sensation undergoing BoNT between March 1 and September 1,2022, were included.Prior to June 1, patients received intravesical 2% lidocaine solution instillation for 30 minutes and lidocaine gel immediately prior to treatment (group 1).After June 1, patients received lidocaine gel (Instillagel) alone (group 2).The visual analogue pain score (VAS) was used to measure patient reported pain immediately following BoNT.Treatment failure was defined as patient requesting to stop treatment during the procedure or patient request to perform future treatments under sedation.Patient demographics, postprocedural complications, and treatment failures were collected by prospective chart review and compared using t-test and Chi-squared test.The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare pain scores between treatment groups.Results: A total of 80 patients were included (mean age 61 years, 75% female, 56% with overactive bladder, 30% receiving first treatment).Thirty-nine patients (49%) were included in group 1 and 41 patients (51%) in group 2. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups (p>0.05).There was no significant difference in overall pain scores between groups: group 1 median VAS 3.0 vs. group 2 median VAS 4.0 (p=0.11).There was no significant difference in pain scores by sex, indication for treatment, or first vs.subsequent BoNT treatment (p>0.05).Post-procedural complications occurred in four patients in group 1 (three UTI, one hematuria) compared to two patients in group 2 (two UTI).Treatment failure did not occur in either group.Conclusions: The use of lidocaine lubricating gel alone immediately before BoNT provided comparable pain control to traditional pre-procedural lidocaine solution instillation and lidocaine gel.There were no treatment failures and complications were low in both groups.The use of lidocaine gel alone may be an acceptable analgesia alternative while improving efficiency of treatment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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 venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicHematological disorders and diagnosticsFrench-language works237,207