MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139891820 · doi:10.1136/eb-2012-101152

Use of cranberry products does not appear to be associated with a significant reduction in incidence of recurrent urinary tract infections

2013· letter· en· W2139891820 on OpenAlexaff
Armando J. Lorenzo, Luis H. Braga

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary systemPlaceboMedicineWeb of scienceIncidence (geometry)Internal medicinePsychological interventionGastroenterologyGynecologyMeta-analysisPathologyMathematicsPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Jepson RG, Williams G, Craig JC. Cranberries for preventing urinary tract infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;10:CD001321.[OpenUrl][1][PubMed][2] Urinary tract infections (UTIs) represent a considerable healthcare burden, with important consequences in terms of morbidity and cost. Preventive measures are limited, not always dramatically effective1 and associated with a concerning increase in the resistance profile of common pathogens to different antibiotics. Thus, there is considerable interest in alternative prophylactic interventions. Among these, cranberry products (CP) are often recommended and utilised. The study by Jepson and colleagues updates a previous analysis on the use of CP for this purpose. The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) of pertinent literature identified by a comprehensive search strategy with an in-depth assessment of randomised and quasi-randomised trials of CP (vs placebo and non-placebo controls) in preventing UTIs. Two investigators independently evaluated and extracted information on methods, participants, interventions … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCochrane%2Bdatabase%2Bof%2Bsystematic%2Breviews%2B%2528Online%2529%26rft.stitle%253DCochrane%2BDatabase%2BSyst%2BRev%26rft.aulast%253DJepson%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%2BG.%26rft.volume%253D10%26rft.spage%253DCD001321%26rft.epage%253DCD001321%26rft.atitle%253DCranberries%2Bfor%2Bpreventing%2Burinary%2Btract%2Binfections.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F23076891%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=23076891&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F18%2F5%2F181.atom

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207