Identifying Bladder Phenotypes After Spinal Cord Injury With Unsupervised Machine Learning: A New Way to Examine Urinary Symptoms and Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients with spinal cord injuries (SCIs) experience variable urinary symptoms and quality of life (QOL). Our objective was to use machine learning to identify bladder-relevant phenotypes after SCI and assess their association with urinary symptoms and QOL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the Neurogenic Bladder Research Group SCI registry. Baseline variables that were previously shown to be associated with bladder symptoms/QOL were included in the machine learning environment. An unsupervised consensus clustering approach (k-prototypes) was used to identify 4 patient clusters. After qualitative review of the clusters, 2 outcomes of interest were assessed: the total Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score (NBSS) and the NBSS-satisfaction question (QOL). The NBSS and NBSS-satisfaction question at baseline and after 1 year were compared between clusters using analysis of variance and linear regression. RESULTS: = .047). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the utility of machine learning in uncovering bladder-relevant phenotypes among SCI patients. Future research should explore cluster-based targeted strategies to enhance bladder-related outcomes and QOL in SCI.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".