A review of the role for pelvic floor physiotherapy in postmenopausal women with urinary incontinence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary incontinence is a prevalent condition affecting women. Pelvic floor physiotherapy is a specialized field of physiotherapy dedicated to assessing and treating pelvic floor muscles. This therapy has demonstrated benefits in addressing stress urinary incontinence in premenopausal women, with numerous studies supporting its efficacy in this population. However, pelvic floor physiotherapy in the treatment of postmenopausal women is less well-established, and furthermore, the types of urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women are much broader. We provide a comprehensive review of recent literature investigating the effectiveness of pelvic floor physiotherapy therapy for various conditions in postmenopausal women, including urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, sexual dysfunction, and urinary incontinence in the context of obesity, frailty, mobility, and dementia. After evaluating the current literature, it is evident that there is insufficient data to definitively endorse or dismiss the utilization of Pelvic floor physiotherapy for treating urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women. Nevertheless, considering the low associated risks of pelvic floor physiotherapy, we advocate for the initiation of comprehensive, large-scale randomized studies aimed at evaluating its effectiveness in addressing urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women with special attention to vulnerable subgroups, including individuals who are obese, frail or experiencing cognitive impairment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".