MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010754935 · doi:10.1159/000499266

Is Non-Chlamydial Non-Gonococcal Urethritis Associated with Significant Clinical Complications in Men? A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3010754935 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cassandra Fairhead, Alexander Hampson, Louis Dwyer-Hemmings, Nikhil Vasdev

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Urology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrethritisReactive arthritisGonorrheaSystematic reviewEpididymitisDermatologyGynecologyArthritisInternal medicineMEDLINESurgeryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: . Associations between non-chlamydial non-gonococcal urethritis (NCNGU) with balanoposthitis, epididymo-orchitis and reactive arthritis have been suggested, but evidence to support these often-theoretical relationships is sparse and further investigation is called for. Concerns over increasing antimicrobial resistance has rendered the need for clarity over this question ever more pressing in recent years. A review of the current evidence on the complications of NCNGU in men is therefore urgently warranted. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review summarizes and evaluates the available evidence that NCNGU, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic, causes the significant complications that are already well-recognized to be associated with non-gonococcal urethritis. These significant complications are epididymo-orchitis, balanoposthitis, and sexually-acquired reactive arthritis (Reiter's syndrome) including arthritis or conjunctivitis. SUMMARY: We conducted a systematic review and qualitative synthesis using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis framework. Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and British Nursing Index) were searched. We included studies that measured clinical outcome after diagnosis of NCNGU in men. Bias was assessed using variations of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data were extracted and entered into a pre-written data abstraction proforma. Seven peer-review studies were included. This included 2 retrospective cohort studies, 1 case series, 2 case reports and 2 cross-sectional studies. The studies described and analyzed 3 types of complication: balanitis, posthitis and/or meatitis; reactive arthritis and/or conjunctivitis; and epididymitis. All studies reported one or more complications. KEY MESSAGES: This review identifies an important avenue for future research: while the available evidence suggests that NCNGU has the potential to cause significant complications in men, with the strongest evidence existing for balanitis, posthitis and/or meatitis, the nature and significance of these relationships is far from clear. The findings of this review suggest that prospective, adequately powered research into whether there is a causal link between NCNGU and significant clinical complications in men would be highly worthwhile. The findings of this review raise important questions about the utility of the term NCNGU in research and clinical practice.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.010
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent UrologySame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207