Effects of the use of silver-coated urinary catheters on the incidence of catheter-associated bacteriuria and urinary tract infection in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the effects of silver-coated versus standard silicone urinary catheters on the incidence of catheter-associated bacteriuria (CAB) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) in dogs. DESIGN Randomized controlled clinical trial. ANIMALS 36 dogs requiring urinary bladder catheterization for ≥ 24 hours. PROCEDURES Dogs were randomly assigned to receive a silver-coated or non-silver-coated (control) silicone Foley catheter. Urine samples for cytologic examination and bacterial culture were collected at the time of catheter insertion and daily until catheters were removed (≥ 24 hours to 7 days later). Results were compared between groups. RESULTS No significant differences were identified between catheter groups in the incidence of CAB or CAUTI. Although the median time to development of cytologically detected bacteriuria, culture-detected bacteriuria, and CAUTI did not differ significantly between groups, median time to CAB development (either method) was significantly longer for dogs that received a control catheter rather than a silver-coated catheter. For both types of catheters combined, older age was a significant predictor of culture-detected bacteriuria, and longer duration of catheterization was a significant predictor of culture-detected bacteriuria and overall CAB. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Silver-coated urinary catheters provided no clinical benefit over standard urinary catheters for the dogs of this study and were associated with earlier development of CAB but not CAUTI. A larger prospective study is required to definitively determine whether the use of silver-coated urinary catheters should or should not be considered to reduce the risk of CAB or CAUTI in dogs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".