MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Urinary tract infection in geriatric and institutionalized patients

2002· review· en· W2016187904 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay E. Nicolle

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreManitoba HealthUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrinary systemIntensive care medicineBacteriuriaAntimicrobialAsymptomaticPopulationGenitourinary systemInternal medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of urinary tract infection in elderly populations and some of the unique features in its evaluation and therapy are becoming better recognized. In elderly populations in the community there are concerns about increasing antimicrobial resistance in infecting organisms. In postmenopausal women, the importance of vaginal estrogen deficiency as a factor which promotes urinary tract infection is becoming increasingly recognized, leading to therapeutic strategies other than antimicrobials. For elderly residents of long term care facilities, urinary tract infection is very common, and most frequent in those with the greatest functional impairment. Whilst it is recognized that asymptomatic bacteriuria should not be treated, the diagnosis of urinary tract infection in this population often presents a dilemma. In particular, the urine culture is useful only in excluding urinary tract infection, not in making a diagnosis of symptomatic infection. There has been a tendency to manage all clinical deterioration in long term care facility residents who have positive urine cultures as urinary tract infection, contributing to excess antimicrobial use and heightening the problem of antimicrobial resistance. Recently published guidelines and commentaries attempt to address this problem.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations92
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in UrologySame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207