Effect of a Bladder Control Self-Management Program Delivered Through a Health Kiosk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of delivering a bladder control self-management program through a multiuser health kiosk and to evaluate the program's effect on urinary incontinence (UI) and incontinence-specific quality of life (QoL). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data collected during participants' interactions with the Bladder Control Module (BCM) from the parent study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: One hundred eleven participants from the parent study were eligible to be included in this secondary analysis. Their mean age was 72.8 years, and most were female (n = 95, 85.6%); 81 (75.7%) identified themselves as Caucasian. Each participant could access the BCM at a health kiosk situated at one of several sites: senior centers, subsidized senior housing, retirement communities, and a public library. METHODS: The BCM comprised 6 sessions self-administered at least 1 week apart. The content focused on lifestyle modification, pelvic floor muscle training, and bladder (habit) retraining, with encouragement of behavioral self-monitoring between sessions. The feasibility of delivering the intervention was measured by the proportion of participants completing each session. The effect of the BCM on incontinence episodes and incontinence-specific QoL was measured, respectively, by a 7-day bladder diary and the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form. RESULTS: Sixty-one of the 111 eligible participants accessed the BCM. Participants recording incontinence episodes in their baseline bladder diary and completing at least 3 BCM sessions experienced significant decreases in median total UI (P = .01), urge UI (P < .001), and stress UI (P = .02) episodes per day. Incontinence-related QoL significantly improved (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the potential effectiveness of providing community-based, kiosk-enabled access to a conservative behavioral intervention designed to improve incontinence-related outcomes among older adults with UI. Additional research with a larger sample is warranted.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".