MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pathogenesis of urinary tract infections: a review

2002· review· en· W2047485482 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Moore, Rene Day, Marilyn K Albers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrethraPerineumUrinary systemBiologyBacteriaMicrobiologyPathogenesisUrinary bladderMedicineImmunologyUrologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathogenesis of urinary tract infections (UTIs) is not well-understood. In this paper, we review the current understanding of UTIs, particularly in relationship to individuals using intermittent catheterization. Relationships exist between the human host, infectious agent and the environment. In the human host, the urethra connects the bladder to potential infectious agents on the perineum. A high-pressure zone exists within the urethra at a point where the urethra passes through the urogenital diaphragm. This zone creates a natural barrier to ascent of organisms colonized in the distal urethra and the bladder itself has natural defences against invading organisms. The interaction of host defences with bacteria (infectious agent) determines whether or not the bacteria persist. A small number of bacteria and some types of bacteria are controlled more effectively by natural bladder defence mechanisms and frequent bladder emptying than a large number of bacteria. Escherichia coli, coliforms and enterococci are considered common bacterial causes of UTIs and are found in high numbers on the perineum. Intermittent catheterization is an effective way of bladder emptying but as an invasive procedure it remains a risk factor in the development of UTI.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207