A Comparison of Short Versus Long Course Intravenous Antibiotics When Treating Urinary Tract Infection in Infants <60 Days of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a common reason for hospitalization in infants younger than 60 days, and the optimal approach to intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy upon UTI diagnosis in this cohort is unknown. We determined whether there was an association between IV antibiotic therapy duration (long [>3 days] vs short [≤3 days]) and treatment failure via a retrospective review of infants with confirmed UTIs receiving IV antibiotics at a tertiary referral center. A total of 403 infants were included; 39% were treated with ampicillin and cefotaxime, and 34% with ampicillin and gentamycin or tobramycin. The median IV antibiotic duration was 5 (interquartile range: 3-10) days, and 5% of patients experienced treatment failure. The treatment failure rate was similar in both short- and long-course IV antibiotic groups ( P > .05), and there was no significant association between treatment duration and failure. We conclude that treatment failure for infants hospitalized with UTI is uncommon and not associated with IV antibiotic duration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".