MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Classification and diagnosis of prostatitis: a gold standard?

2003· article· en· W2104796749 on OpenAlexaff
J. Curtis Nickel

Bibliographic record

VenueAndrologia · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsProstatitisMedicineUrinalysisChronic bacterial prostatitisGold standard (test)Rectal examinationUrinary systemUrologyPhysical examinationUrineLower urinary tract symptomsCystoscopyInternal medicineProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Institutes of Health Classification System for prostatitis has now been accepted by the North American and International urology community. This categorization system consists of category I (acute bacterial prostatitis), category II (chronic bacterial prostatitis), category III (chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome - CP/CPPS) and category IV asymptomatic inflammatory prostatitis. The evaluation of a patient with category I and category II bacterial prostatitis consists of history and physical examination and urine culture for lower urinary tract localization cultures, respectively. The clinical tests for the evaluation of CP/CPPS can be classified as mandatory, recommended and optional. Mandatory evaluations include history and physical examination, urinalysis and urine culture. Recommended evaluations include lower urinary tract localization tests, symptom index, flow rate, residual urine determination and urine cytology. Optional evaluations include semen analysis and culture, urethral swab, urodynamics, cystoscopy, imaging, and prostate specific antigen determination. The physician must individualize a rational diagnostic strategy for each patient. There is no 'gold standard' for the diagnosis and evaluation of patients presenting with prostatitis.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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

Citations51
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAndrologiaSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207