Prevalencia de incontinencia urinária em praticantes de Crossfit e Corrida
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Urinary incontinence (UI) is prevalent in athletes but needs further study. Aims: To compare the prevalence of UI among female CrossFit practitioners and female runners. Method: Quantitative descriptive cross-sectional study, composed of physically active nulliparous women, practitioners of CrossFit or running for at least 6 months, 3 times a week, evaluated by the ICIQ-SF. Results: Of the 223 volunteers, 62 were included. CrossFit Group (G1 n=31) and Running Group (G2 n=31). In G2, 19 (61.3%) had UI against 11 (35.5%) in G1, reporting UI on several occasions, mostly unrelated to sports practice. Conclusion: UI is more prevalent in female runners when compared to female CrossFit practitioners. Furthermore, it was noticed that, in general, urinary incontinence is more recurrent in high-impact sports, associated with a negative impact on the quality of life of these women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".