MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391879606 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.8701

Outcomes after chronic isolated epididymal pain

2024· article· en· W4391879606 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMale Reproductive Health Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpididymitisChronic painPsychosocialEtiologyNatural historyDistressScrotal PainDemographicsInternal medicinePhysical therapySurgeryPsychiatryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Despite being a commonly encountered urologic condition, there remains a paucity of understanding and literature on the management and natural history of isolated epididymal pain. Typically, patients who do not respond to conservative management undergo an epididymectomy; however, the literature on its efficacy is also scarce, with success rates varying from 10-90%. Our goal was to better describe the etiology and natural history of isolated epididymal pain and to describe the rates of success associated with epididymectomy. METHODS: A retrospective, case-control study was conducted at the Manitoba Men's Health Clinic, with the approval of the University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board. All patients presenting with chronic epididymitis, defined as discomfort or pain localized to the epididymis for at least three months, were identified. Information regarding patient demographics, past medical and surgical history, duration of pain, localization of pain, findings on previous ultrasounds, prior conservative therapies trialed, and response rates, as well as response rates to surgical therapy were collected. RESULTS: From April 2022 to April 2023, a total of 275 patients with chronic orchialgia were identified; among them, 74 patients presented with chronic isolated epididymal pain. On average, 22.9% of patients experienced symptoms for 3-6 months, 10% for 6-12 months, and 67.1% for over 12 months; 13.5% (n=10) had associated ejaculatory pain, 8.1% (n=6) had lower urinary tract symptoms, and 4.1% (n=3) had erectile dysfunction. Ultrasound findings were observed in 68.9% of patients, with 31.1% having an epididymal cyst, 27.1% having a varicocele, 5.4% having a spermatocele, and 4.1% having a hydrocele. Among those who underwent conservative therapy, only 36.2% of patients reported a positive response. Surgical intervention was performed on 23 patients, including 16 who underwent epididymectomy, three who underwent cord denervation, and two who underwent vasovasostomy and spermatocelectomy each. Most (81.3%, n=13) patients who underwent epididymectomy had a positive response to the surgical intervention, defined as no pain on followup, while all patients undergoing other surgical interventions experienced a positive response. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic epididymal pain is a condition with limited data surrounding its management. Prior to referral, a large proportion of patients did not undergo any conservative treatment, and of those that did, there was limited response. For those who underwent surgical intervention, all were pain-free on followup, except three patients who underwent epididymectomy.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.328 · 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