MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2903567098 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023808

Non-standard treatment for uncomplicated <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> urogenital infections: a systematic review

2018· review· en· W2903567098 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jessica Krahn, Aaron Louette, Vera Caine, Shalane Ha, Tom Wong, Tim T Y Lau, Ameeta E. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPublic Health Agency of CanadaShared Services CanadaUniversity of Alberta
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineChlamydia trachomatisGenitourinary systemChlamydiaGenitourinary medicineChlamydia trachomatis infectionEpidemiologyGynecologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineImmunologyHuman papilloma virus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: (CT) infections in adolescents and adults. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Trials & Systematic Review Databases, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov and Health Canada Trials Database were searched for studies in English or French from 1 January 2006 to 6 August 2017. Keywords included CT, anti-infective or anti-bacterial agents, therapy/pharmacotherapy/management. REVIEW METHODS: Included were primary research studies. Outcome measures included clinical or microbiological cure, treatment failure and adverse events. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias V.2.0 tool for randomised and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for non-randomised studies. FUNDING SOURCE: Public Health Agency of Canada. RESULTS: Of the 6899 records identified through the database search, 11 studies were included. One randomised controlled trial reported that delayed release doxycycline was non-inferior to azithromycin. Two studies examined higher doses of azithromycin but reported no additional benefit. One study looked at a 5-day azithromycin treatment regimen and reported a high cure rate. Two studies reported efficacy of sitafloxacin, and a single study supports the use of levofloxacin. Two phase 2 studies reported efficacy of single-dose rifalazil in both men and women. Only one retrospective study was identified that examined treatment in pregnant women and reported that efficacy with single-dose azithromycin exceeded that of amoxicillin and erythromycin. A single study examining the efficacy of a beta-lactam antibiotic was stopped early due to high treatment failures. CONCLUSIONS: The paucity of existing data highlights the need for further adequately powered studies to evaluate rifalazil, delayed release doxycycline, levofloxacin and other agents for the treatment of uncomplicated CT infections. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017073096.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.010
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicReproductive tract infections research→French-language works237,207→