Catheterization Does Not Improve Course of Disease in Female Patients with Acute Cystitis or Pyelonephritis: Retrospective Analysis of >300 In-Hospital Treated Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Females with in-hospital treatment for acute cystitis (AC) or pyelonephritis may benefit from catheterization at admission. METHODS: All female patients with AC or pyelonephritis requiring in-hospital treatment at University Hospital Frankfurt (2004-2019) were retrospectively analyzed. Logistic regression models were used to predict the catheter value. RESULTS: Of 310 female patients, 40% harbored AC versus 60% pyelonephritis, of whom 62% and 74% received a catheter at admission: C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood count (WBC) were significantly elevated in AC and pyelonephritis catheter versus no catheter patients (both p < 0.05). Time to CRP and WBC nadir did not differ between the AC catheter versus no catheter group (both p > 0.05). Conversely, time to CRP nadir was prolonged in pyelonephritis catheter patients. AC and pyelonephritis catheter patients exhibited a prolonged antibiotic treatment and length of stay (LOS, both p < 0.05). In multivariable analyses, CRP >5 ng/mL was a predictor for receiving a catheter in all patients. In AC, a positive urine culture and fever predicted, respectively, prolonged LOS or antibiotic treatment (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Risk factors exist with regard to receiving a catheter and prolonged antibiotic treatment or LOS in females with AC or pyelonephritis. A catheter may not accelerate recovery or WBC nadir.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".