Re: Best Practice Policy Statement on Urologic Surgery Antimicrobial Prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No AccessJournal of UrologyLetter to the Editor/Errata1 Aug 2009Re: Best Practice Policy Statement on Urologic Surgery Antimicrobial ProphylaxisJ. S. Wolf, Jr., C. J. Bennett, R. R. Dmochowski, B. K. Hollenbeck, M. S. Pearle and A. J. Schaeffer J Urol 2008; 179: 1379–1390 Michael Ordon, Ron Kodama, and R. John D'A. Honey Michael OrdonMichael Ordon Lithotripsy Associates, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author , Ron KodamaRon Kodama Lithotripsy Associates, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author , and R. John D'A. HoneyR. John D'A. Honey Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.04.051AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail References 1 : Antimicrobial prophylaxis prior to shock wave lithotripsy in patients with sterile urine before treatment: a meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Urology1997; 49: 679. Google Scholar 2 : Amoxycillin/clavulanate prophylaxis for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy—a comparative study. J Antimicrob Chemother, suppl.1989; 24: 217. Google Scholar 3 : Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic procedures: a systematic review. Eur Urol2008; 54: 1270. Google Scholar 4 : The value of antibiotic prophylaxis during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the prevention of urinary tract infections in patients with urine proven sterile prior to treatment. Eur Urol1997; 31: 30. Google Scholar 5 : Antibiotic prophylaxis before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy by single-shot application of azlocillin. Chemioterapia, suppl.1987; 6: 607. Google Scholar 6 : Antibiotic prophylaxis with enoxacin in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Infection, suppl.1989; 17: S37. Google Scholar 7 : Are prophylactic antibiotics necessary during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?. Br J Urol1989; 63: 449. Google Scholar 8 : Clinical study of urinary tract infection after treatment with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotriptor: Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotriptor. Nippon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi1987; 78: 1240. Google Scholar 9 : Guidelines on the Management of Urinary and Male Genital Tract Infections. Arnhem, The Netherlands: European Association of Urology2008. Google Scholar © 2009 by American Urological AssociationFiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 182Issue 2August 2009Page: 799-801 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2009 by American Urological AssociationMetricsAuthor Information Michael Ordon Lithotripsy Associates, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author Ron Kodama Lithotripsy Associates, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author R. John D'A. Honey Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0.027 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.062 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.168 | 0.196 |
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".