Non-invasive evaluation of incontinence in children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Urinary incontinence and LUTS are common in patients with cerebral palsy (CP). Although recommended in typically developing children, non-invasive uroflow measurement is not routinely used in children with CP. The objective of the study is to investigate uroflowmetry in children with CP. Patients and methods: A cross-sectional observational study is conducted including children with CP between five and twelve years old. Children are evaluated using uroflowmetry and the validated Dutch Vancouver Symptom Score for Dysfunctional Elimination Syndrome questionnaire. Results: Forty-five children were included, with a mean age of 8,3 years old and 58 % being male. 24 children (53%) were dry and 21 (47%) children were incontinent. A bell-shaped curve was most frequently seen and demonstrated by 19 (42%) children. A significant difference of flow pattern (p < 0.01) was noted between continence status, with more than 50 % of the dry children demonstrating a bell shaped curve and children with combined daytime incontinence and enuresis demonstrating only pathologically shaped curves. Within this last group, half of them could not void despite having a filled bladder. Voided volume as percentage of expected bladder capacity for age tended to be lower (36.3 % vs. 61.8 %; p = 0.04) in children with incontinence. Conclusion: Non-invasive uroflow measurement could be useful in children with CP. Depending results, redirection to invasive urodynamic evaluation can be necessary. Special attention should be given to those who have combined daytime incontinence and enuresis and cannot void on uroflowmetry.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".