Spectrum of Bacterial Pathogens from Urinary Infections Associated with Struvite and Metabolic Stones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The purposes of this multi-center study were to evaluate the rate of infection stones and to evaluate the urine cultures of patients with infection stones. Materials: Charts of adulpatients with urinary stones were reviewed and data on stone analyses and urine cultures were collected. Results: In total, 1204 renal stone formers (RSFs) from 10 countries were included (776 males, 428 females). Fifty-six patients (4.6%) had struvite stones. The highest frequency of struvite stones was observed in India (23%) and Pakistan (18%). Lower rates were reported in Canada (2%), China (3%), Argentina (3%), Iraq (3%), Italy (3.5%) and Poland (3%), and intermediate rates in Egypt (5.5%) and Bulgaria (5.4%). Urine cultures were retrieved from 508 patients. Patients with struvite stones had a positive culture in 64.3% of the samples and patients with other stones, in 26.7%. In struvite stones, the most common isolates were Escherichia coli (27.7%) and Proteus spp. (27.7%), followed by Klebsiella spp. (16.7%); in other types of stone, it was Escherichia coli (47.6%), followed by Gram-positive bacteria (14.0%) Conclusions: The struvite stone composition was associated with a urinary infection, although an infection was not demonstrable with a conventional midstream urine culture in about 30%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".