Optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated urinary tract infection in older women: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy in older patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is still a matter of debate. The aim of this randomized controlled double-blind noninferiority trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of 3-day and 7-day courses of oral ciprofloxacin for uncomplicated symptomatic UTI in older women. METHODS: A total of 183 women at least 65 years of age with acute uncomplicated UTI were recruited from ambulatory clinics and hospital acute care units. Patients with pyelonephritis, contraindications to fluoroquinolones, recent use of antibiotics, urinary tract abnormalities and diabetes mellitus were excluded. Women were randomly assigned to receive either ciprofloxacin 250 mg twice daily orally for 3 days followed by placebo for 4 days (the 3-day group, 93 patients) or ciprofloxacin 250 mg twice daily orally for 7 days (the 7-day group, 90 patients). Bacterial eradication, clinical improvement and occurrence of adverse events were determined 2 days after completion of treatment, and occurrence of reinfection or relapse were determined 6 weeks after completion of treatment. Bacterial eradication and relapse were determined by urine culture. Double-blind procedures were maintained throughout data collection. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with bacterial eradication at 2 days after treatment was 98% (91/93) in the 3-day group and 93% (83/89) in the 7-day group (p = 0.16). The frequency of adverse events, including drowsiness, headache, nausea or vomiting, and loss of appetite, was significantly lower in the 3-day group. INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that a 3-day course of antibiotic therapy is not inferior to a 7-day course for treatment of uncomplicated symptomatic UTI in older women, and that the shorter course is better tolerated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".