Intermittent azithromycin treatment for respiratory symptoms in patients with chronic chlamydia pneumoniae infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chlamydia pneumoniae (Cpn) is a common respiratory pathogen with a biphasic replicative cycle and has a tendency to cause chronic infections. Azithromycin is commonly used for the treatment of Cpn infections, but little is known about the optimal dose and duration of therapy. In this prospective double-blind, randomized study the effects of azithromycin and placebo were compared regarding longstanding airway and/or pharyngeal symptoms in patients with chronic Cpn infection. Further, effects on antibody titres and lung function were assessed. 103 patients were treated with either azithromycin 500 mg daily for 5 d, repeated 3 times with a 23-d interval, or placebo. Patients were examined 4 months and 1 y after completed treatment. Evaluation of symptoms showed general improvement and less hawking in patients treated with azithromycin compared to placebo after 4 months, but there was no sustained difference 1 y after completed treatment. The antibody titres remained stable, and there was no influence on lung function. Adverse events, primarily gastrointestinal, were more frequently reported with azithromycin than placebo. In conclusion, azithromycin was effective for reduction of respiratory symptoms in patients with chronic Cpn infection, but prolonged intermittent treatment with high doses did not eradicate the chronic infection.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".