Impact of Bladder Management Strategies on Autonomic Dysreflexia Severity in People With Spinal Cord Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigated whether severity of autonomic dysreflexia (AD) was associated with more patient-reported bladder and bowel symptoms and compared AD severity by bladder management strategy in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: The Neurogenic Bladder Research Group SCI Registry is a prospective study which evaluated quality of life after SCI. Bladder and bowel symptoms were assessed through Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score and Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction score, respectively. AD severity was assessed with the Autonomic Dysreflexia Following Spinal Cord Injury (ADFSCI) instrument. Bladder management was classified as volitional voiding, clean intermittent catheterization (CIC), indwelling catheter (IDC), and surgery (augmentation and diversion). RESULTS: AD scores were identified for 1473 people. The mean age was 45. Bladder management was CIC in 754 (51%), IDC in 271 (18%), surgery in 195 (13%) and voiding in 259 (18%). On univariate analysis, higher ADFSCI scores occurred with complete injuries (3.1 vs 3.4, p = 0.03), cervical/thoracic injuries (3.8 vs 1.5, p < 0.0001), and chronic pain (3.9 vs 2.9, p = 0.0004). IDC (5.2) and surgery (4.5) had higher ADFSCI scores than CIC (3.0) and volitional voiding (2.8) (p < 0.0001). Sub-analysis showed bladder augmentation had significantly higher ADSCI scores than diversion (4.7 vs 3.7, p = 0.03). On multivariate analysis, level of injury, bladder management, and bowel and bladder symptoms remained associated with worse AD. CONCLUSION: Level of injury, age, worse bowel and bladder symptoms and bladder management type were associated with higher AD scores. Bladder management with surgery, particularly bladder augment, and IDC had associated greater AD symptoms compared to CIC or voiding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NTC06216081 and HSRP20153564, U.S. National Library of Medicine, wwwcf.nlm.nih.gov.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".