MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Treatment of early Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in patients with cystic fibrosis

2006· review· en· W2112521661 on OpenAlexaff
Félix Ratjen

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePseudomonas aeruginosaCystic fibrosisMicrobiologyInternal medicineBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While Pseudomonas aeruginosa continues to be the major pathogen in cystic fibrosis lung disease, there is increasing evidence that antibiotic therapy initiated early after the onset of infection is an effective strategy to postpone chronic P. aeruginosa infection. There are also studies showing that early treatment can eradicate the organism in the majority of cases. RECENT FINDINGS: While comparative data for different treatment strategies are currently lacking, inhaled antibiotic therapy alone or in combination with ciprofloxacin has been shown to be efficacious. So far eradication of P. aeruginosa has not been associated with an increased risk of airway infection with other pathogens, but these studies have been performed in small cohorts. Additional information is also needed to clarify the optimal form and duration of therapy. Currently, there are two large studies ongoing to resolve some of these issues. SUMMARY: There is sufficient evidence that early antibiotic therapy against P. aeruginosa can clear the bacteria from the respiratory tract. While the negative effects of chronic P. aeruginosa infection are well documented, long-term benefits of this intervention on lung function is lacking. Observational studies suggest, however, that early intervention therapy is both beneficial and cost effective for cystic fibrosis patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations47
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Pulmonary MedicineSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207