MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W254190518

In vitro evaluation of the impact of silver coating on Escherichia coli adherence to urinary catheters.

2015· article· en· W254190518 on OpenAlexaff
Adam T. Ogilvie, Brigitte A. Brisson, Ameet Singh, J. Scott Weese

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEscherichia coliUrinary systemCatheterMicrobiologyBiofilmBacteriaUrinary catheterMedicineChemistrySurgeryBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A silver-coated urinary catheter was compared to a non-silver-coated urinary catheter for the ability to reduce adherence of 6 isolates of Escherichia coli. Catheters were incubated with E. coli strains for 0, 24, 48, and 72 h. Broth was sampled at all time points to determine CFU/mL. Catheters were subjected to sonication to determine adhered bacteria at all time points, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to semi-quantitatively assess biofilm formation. Silver-coated catheters had significantly less adhered bacteria than non-silver-coated catheters at times 24, 48, and 72 h. Subjectively, silver-coated urinary catheters had less biofilm formation than non-silver-coated urinary catheters as assessed by SEM. Silver coating of catheters was associated with reduced adherence of E. coli in an in vitro evaluation. Testing of catheters in dogs in vivo is required to determine if there is a reduction in catheter-associated urinary tract infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.339
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207