MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130063107 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001067

Antibiotic regimens for endometritis after delivery

2002· review· en· W2130063107 on OpenAlexaff
L. R. French, FM Smaill

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndometritisRelative riskClindamycinRegimenMetronidazoleAntibioticsCaesarean sectionInternal medicineChildbirthObstetricsPregnancyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Post-partum endometritis, which is more common after cesarean section, occurs when vaginal organisms invade the endometrial cavity during labour and birth. Antibiotic treatment is warranted. OBJECTIVES: The effect of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of postpartum endometritis on failure of therapy and complications was systematically reviewed. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Date of last search: June 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of different antibiotic regimens for postpartum endometritis, after cesarean section or vaginal birth, where outcomes of treatment failure or complications were reported were selected. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted independently by the reviewers. Comparisons were made between different types of antibiotic regimen, based on type of antibiotic and duration and route of administration. Summary relative risks were calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-seven trials were included. Overall the studies were methodologically poor. In the intent-to-treat analysis, fifteen studies comparing clindamycin and an aminoglycoside with another regimen showed more treatment failures with another regimen (relative risk (RR) 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-1.60). Failures of those regimens with poor activity against penicillin resistant anaerobic bacteria were more likely (RR 1.53; 95% CI 1.10-2.13). In four studies that compared continued oral antibiotic therapy after intravenous therapy, no differences were found in recurrent endometritis or other outcomes. There was no evidence of difference in incidence of allergic reactions. Cephalosporins were associated with less diarrhea. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gentamicin and clindamycin is appropriate for the treatment of endometritis. Regimens with activity against penicillin resistant anaerobic bacteria are better than those without. There is no evidence that any one regimen is associated with fewer side effects. Once uncomplicated endometritis has clinically improved with intravenous therapy, oral therapy is not needed.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.015

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.202 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations99
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Cochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207