MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Asymptomatic bacteriuria and symptomatic urinary tract infections in pregnancy

2008· review· en· W1985894646 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Schnarr, Fiona Smaill

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBacteriuriaAsymptomaticUrinary systemPregnancyAntibioticsIntensive care medicineAsymptomatic bacteriuriaInternal medicineObstetricsPediatricsMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symptomatic and asymptomatic bacteriuria is common in pregnant women. A history of previous urinary tract infections and low socioeconomic status are risk factors for bacteriuria in pregnancy. Escherichia coli is the most common aetiologic agent in both symptomatic and asymptomatic infection and quantitative culture is the gold standard for diagnosis. Treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria has been shown to reduce the rate of pyelonephritis in pregnancy and therefore screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria has become a standard of obstetrical care. Antibiotic treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria is associated with a decrease in the incidence of low birth weight, but the methodological quality of the studies limits the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn. Debate exists in the literature as to whether treated pyelonephritis is associated with adverse fetal outcomes. There is no clear consensus in the literature on antibiotic choice or duration of therapy for infection. With increasing antibiotic resistance, consideration of local resistance rates is necessary when choosing therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations343
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207