Uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women. Current practice and the effect of antibiotic resistance on empiric treatment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review treatment recommendations for empiric therapy of uncomplicated urinary tract infection (uUTI) in light of evolving antibiotic resistance and to consider use of guidelines to promote optimal practice. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: PubMed was searched and additional relevant references were identified by reviewing articles found in the search. Guidelines were identified through discussion with family practitioners. Level of evidence was assessed for recommendations. MAIN MESSAGE: Many women have uUTIs. The treatment approach is usually empiric antimicrobial therapy without obtaining pretherapy cultures. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is standard first-line empiric treatment. While resistance to this drug is increasing, it remains only about 10% in community-acquired Escherichia coli in Canada. Concerns about increased resistance have contributed to greater use of fluoroquinolones, but widespread empiric use of this class of medications might promote resistance to fluoroquinolones. Hence, fluoroquinolones should not be considered first-line therapy. While guidelines for treatment of uUTIs have been developed, their usefulness is compromised by their conflicting recommendations. CONCLUSION: Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and nitrofurantoin remain first-choice empiric therapy for uUTIs. Development of guidelines relevant to family physicians and community education programs that incorporate local susceptibility patterns are important strategies for promoting optimal practice.
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 | 0.010 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".