Impact of drainage catheter material, size, and anti-dislodgement mechanism on percutaneous nephrostomy exchange intervals: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Background:</ns3:bold> Percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) is a commonly performed procedure by interventional radiology and urology to treat urinary obstruction. In this procedure, a catheter is percutaneously placed into the renal pelvis for urinary diversion or hemorrhagic cystitis. Material type, catheter size, and catheter shape (anti-dislodgement feature) ultimately contribute to the inherent traits of longevity in drainage catheter device. Reviewing the relative strengths or weaknesses of products in the existing clinical market may help clinicians critically appraise the devices they use with evidence-based findings from this review. Furthermore, a deeper understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of existing devices may help inform the next generation of drainage catheter devices to prolong the interval between exchanges without detriment to patient safety. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> The following electronic databases will be queried: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane from their inception to January 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies to investigate the differences that our interventions of catheter material, size, and dislodgement mechanism will have on the exchange interval (standard of care 90 days <ns3:italic>vs.</ns3:italic> 60 days <ns3:italic>vs.</ns3:italic> 45 days <ns3:italic>vs.</ns3:italic> 30 days). The primary outcomes will be the drainage catheter exchange frequency. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Ethics and dissemination:</ns3:bold> We aim to share our findings through high-impact peer reviewed journals. As drainage catheters and minimally invasive interventional radiology procedures become more popular, it is important for healthcare providers taking case of these populations to understand which variables might optimize patient care and minimize emergent exchanges. Data will be made available to readers. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Registration:</ns3:bold> PROSPERO ( <ns3:ext-link xmlns:ns4="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns4:href="https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023432788">CRD42023432788</ns3:ext-link> , 16 June 2023). </ns3:p>
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".