Population-based laboratory surveillance of Hafnia alvei isolates in a large Canadian health region.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital-based series have characterized Hafnia alvei primarily as an infrequent agent of polymicrobial nosocomial infections in males with underlying illness. METHODS: We conducted population-based laboratory surveillance in the Calgary Health Region during 2000-2005 to define the incidence, demographic risk factors for acquisition, and anti-microbial susceptibilities of Hafnia alvei isolates. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients with Hafnia alvei isolates were identified (2.1/100,000/year) and two-thirds were of community onset. Older age and female gender were important risk factors for acquisition. The most common focus of isolation was urine in 112 (81%), followed by lower respiratory tract in 10 (7%), and soft tissue in 5 (4%), and the majority (94; 68%) were mono-microbial. Most isolates were resistant to ampicillin (111;80%), cephalothin (106; 77%), amoxicillin/clavulanate (98; 71%), and cefazolin (95; 69%) but none to imipenem or ciprofloxacin. CONCLUSION: Hafnia alvei was most commonly isolated as a mono-microbial etiology from the urinary tract in women from the community. This study highlights the importance of population-based studies in accurately defining the epidemiology of an infectious disease.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".