Long‐Term<i>Escherichia coli</i>Asymptomatic Bacteriuria among Women with Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persistent Escherichia coli asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) is common among persons with diabetes mellitus, but the duration of colonization and the rates of recolonization are unknown. We estimated the duration of colonization and the rate of recolonization among successively isolated E. coli from diabetic women with ASB and compared the virulence profiles with uropathogenic and commensal E. coli. METHODS: A total of 105 women with diabetes were enrolled in a randomized, controlled clinical trial for treatment of ASB in Manitoba, Canada, and were observed at least every 3 months for up to 3 years. We analyzed 517 isolates from 70 women with repeated E. coli ASB for genetic similarity using enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus polymerase chain reaction. Unique strains were screened for uropathogenic virulence characteristics using dot blot hybridization and compared with different collections of E. coli isolates. RESULTS: On average, differences were found among women assigned to treatment for ASB, those treated only for symptomatic infections, and untreated women in (1) follow-up time with bacteriuria (29%, 31%, and 66%, respectively; P<.001), (2) duration of bacteriuria (2.2, 2.5, and 3.7 months, respectively; P=.04), and (3) carriage of unique isolates (2.4, 2.8, and 4 months, respectively; P=.03). Women assigned to antibiotic treatment usually had recurrent infection (76%), 64% of the time with a genetically new E. coli strain. Virulence characteristics of these isolates were comparable to those of fecal isolates from healthy women. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment may reduce the overall proportion of time infected in the long term and carriage of a unique strain, but most treatment regimens were followed by subsequent recolonization. Infecting strains did not have virulence factors characteristic of uropathogenic E. coli.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".