MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W161458154

The management of acute pyelonephritis in adults.

2001· article· en· W161458154 on OpenAlexaff
J. Curtis Nickel

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrinalysisAntibioticsDosingUrinary systemIntravenous therapySulfamethoxazoleBacteriuriaBlood culturePercutaneous nephrostomyIntensive care medicinePhysical examinationUrinePercutaneousSurgeryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute pyelonephritis should be classified clinically at the time of presentation into either uncomplicated or complicated categories. The diagnostic workup includes history, physical examination, urinalysis (including a Gram stain), and urine culture. Patients with suspected complicated pyelonephritis require the standard assessment plus blood cultures and urinary tract imaging, preferably a computed tomography (CT) scan. Patients with moderate, uncomplicated pyelonephritis can be managed as outpatients with either a fluoroquinolone (7-14 days) or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (at least 14 days). Patients with severe, uncomplicated pyelonephritis can be considered for short-term hospitalization and initial administration of intravenous antibiotics. Therapy for patients with complicated pyelonephritis should include initial hospitalization, supportive therapies, administration of wide spectrum intravenous antibiotic therapy, and relief of aggravating conditions. Such maneuvers could consist of simple bladder catheterization, percutaneous nephrostomy drainage, or definitive surgery. Patients with complicated pyelonephritis require longer duration of culture-specific antibiotic dosing, careful monitoring, long-term follow-up, and possible definitive management of their underlying condition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207