MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2208283045 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.04.051

Re: Best Practice Policy Statement on Urologic Surgery Antimicrobial Prophylaxis

2009· letter· en· W2208283045 on OpenAlex
Michael Ordon, Ron Kodama, R. John D’A. Honey

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExtracorporeal shock wave lithotripsyAntibiotic prophylaxisAntimicrobialGeneral surgeryLithotripsyAntibioticsSurgeryMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.286 · 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