Group-based pelvic floor telerehabilitation for urinary incontinence in older women: A six-month follow-up pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence is prevalent among older women. This pilot study evaluated the effects of an online group-based pelvic floor muscle training program in older women with urinary incontinence at a six-month follow-up. METHODS: Women aged 65 and over, with stress or mixed urinary incontinence, were recruited. Eligibility was established through in-person evaluations, during which pelvic floor physiotherapists taught and verified correct pelvic floor muscles contraction using digital palpation. The 12-week online pelvic floor muscle training program comprised weekly one-hour training sessions, followed by an unsupervised maintenance exercise regimen. Data were collected before the program (PRE), immediately after (POST), during an interim phone call three months after the end of the program (3MO) and at a follow-up six months after the end of the program (6MO). Participants reported symptoms of urinary incontinence using a 7-day bladder diary and standardized questionnaires at PRE, POST and 6MO. Adherence to maintenance exercises was recorded at 3MO and 6MO. At 6MO, participants provided feedback on their perceived improvement and overall satisfaction. RESULTS: Women experienced a median leakage reduction of 73 % (range 38-88 %) from PRE to 6MO. Improvements were maintained from POST to 6MO for leakage episodes, symptoms of urinary incontinence, quality of life, and urinary incontinence self-efficacy. Adherence to maintenance exercises was substantial at 3MO and 6MO. Participants expressed high satisfaction with symptom improvement and the program overall at 6MO. CONCLUSIONS: A 12-week online group-based pelvic floor muscle training including an in-person pelvic floor muscle evaluation and an unsupervised maintenance exercise regimen demonstrated sustained clinical benefits. Further validation through a randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".