MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389080759 · doi:10.1080/08998280.2023.2282144

A comparison of clinical outcomes associated with dosing metronidazole every 8 hours versus every 12 hours: a systematic review and metaanalysis

2023· review· en· W4389080759 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Theresa Jizba, Faran Ahmad, Ryan W. Walters, Pamela A. Foral, Christopher J. Destache, Manasa Velagapudi

Bibliographic record

VenueBaylor University Medical Center Proceedings · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetronidazoleDosingMedicineConfidence intervalInternal medicineChecklistAnaerobic exerciseRandomized controlled trialAntibioticsPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Metronidazole treats obligate anaerobic bacterial and protozoal infections, with an elimination half-life of around 8 hours. The long elimination half-life, the favorable ratio of steady-state serum levels to minimum inhibitory concentration, and the presence of active metabolites have led to the consideration of metronidazole use at 12-hour dosage intervals. This systematic review aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of twice-daily and thrice-daily metronidazole dosing.Methods Using the PRISMA checklist, we searched five databases to systematically identify all relevant studies published up to June 16, 2023.Results The final analysis included two published retrospective cohort studies of hospitalized adult patients: a single site study (n = 200) and a multisite study (n = 85) of “good” quality, as measured by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The reported baseline characteristics of the 8-hour and 12-hour dosing groups were comparable, and neither study identified significant differences in primary and secondary clinical outcomes. Metaanalysis of the need to escalate antibiotic therapy also showed no statistically significant differences using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method (95% confidence interval: 47.6% lower to 6.4 times higher risk, P = 0.34) and inverse-variance method (risk ratio: 1.87; 95% confidence interval: 0.52–6.65, P = 0.34).Conclusions This review suggests that dosing metronidazole every 12 hours is as effective as every-8-hour dosing for hospitalized patients with anaerobic infections. These encouraging findings would benefit from validation by a multicenter randomized controlled trial since there would be many benefits to a 12-hour dosing interval while achieving similar clinical outcomes with traditional dosing. The studies in this systematic review excluded patients with Clostridioides difficile and central nervous system and amebiasis infections, so the findings do not apply to these infection types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBaylor University Medical Center ProceedingsSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207