MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507524891 · doi:10.1155/2011/745090

Evaluation of the Do Bugs Need Drugs? Program in British Columbia: Can We Curb Antibiotic Prescribing?

2011· article· en· W1507524891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsMinistry of HealthFraser HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaInterior HealthBC Centre for Disease Control
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBusinessMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Antibiotic resistance is accelerated by the overuse of antibiotics. Do Bugs Need Drugs? is an educational program adapted in British Columbia to target both the public and health care professionals, with the aim of reducing unnecessary prescribing. The current article presents a descriptive evaluation of the impact of the program over the first four years. METHOD: Program implementation was measured by the amount of educational material distributed and the level of participation in educational sessions. The impact of the program was assessed by measuring changes in knowledge and prescribing habits of participating physicians, and by investigating provincial trends in antibiotic use. METHOD: Program implementation was measured by the amount of educational material distributed and the level of participation in educational sessions. The impact of the program was assessed by measuring changes in knowledge and prescribing habits of participating physicians, and by investigating provincial trends in antibiotic use. RESULTS: A total of 51,367 children, assisted‐living residents and health care professionals have participated in the program since its inception in the fall of 2005. Pre‐ and postcourse assessments of participating physicians indicated significant improvements in clinical knowledge and appropriate antibiotic treatment of upper respiratory tract infections. Overall rates of antibiotic use in the province have stabilized since 2006. The rates of consumption of fluoroquinolones and macrolides have levelled off since 2005. Utilization rates for acute bronchitis are at the same level as when the program was first implemented, but rates for other acute upper respiratory tract infections of interest have declined. CONCLUSIONS: The Do Bugs Need Drugs? program significantly improves physician antibiotic prescription decisions and is ecologically associated with desirable change in population antibiotic consumption patterns.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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