Should emergentologists follow up on patients diagnosed with UTI having negative urine cultures? Implications for processing post‐discharge laboratory results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: After patients are discharged from the emergency department (ED), follow-up of test results focuses on abnormal values. In the elderly, non-specific symptoms can result in an incorrect diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI). This study compared the outcomes of patients discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of UTI based on urine culture results. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked health databases and chart review of a random sample of elderly patients (age > 65 years) discharged from the Ottawa Hospital ED between 2006 and 2014 with a diagnosis of UTI. Patients were categorized based on whether urine cultures were positive and bacterial sensitivity to prescribed antibiotics. Primary outcome was return to ED, admission to hospital, or death within 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 1001 patients were included in the study (401 culture-negative; 474 culture-positive antibiotic-sensitive; 126 culture positive antibiotic-insensitive). Patients were elderly (mean age 80 years, SD 7.6) with a high prevalence of dementia (18.0%). Almost a third of patients (n = 313, 31.3%) experienced an outcome. Compared to culture-positive antibiotic-sensitive patients, culture negative patients (adjOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.07-1.97) and culture-positive antibiotic-insensitive patients (adjOR 1.49, 95% CI 0.90-2.14) were significantly more likely to experience an outcome (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Patients discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of UTI have an increased risk of return to ED, urgent readmission or death if the uropathogen is insensitive to the prescribed antibiotic or if the culture is negative. Patients diagnosed with UTI with a negative culture may need further assessment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".