Evaluation of Stability of Cefotaxime (30-μg) and Ceftazidime (30-μg) Disks Impregnated with Clavulanic Acid (10 μg) for Detection of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) activity inEscherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, orKlebsiella oxytoca can be detected by using a standard disk diffusion susceptibility test method with cefotaxime (30-μg), ceftriaxone (30-μg), ceftazidime (30-μg), cefpodoxime (10-μg), or aztreonam (30-μg) disks (2, 3). The presence of an ESBL can then be confirmed by a phenotypic confirmatory disk diffusion test recommended by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (3) or by the double disk synergy test described by Jarlier et al. (1). The phenotypic confirmatory disk diffusion test is relatively simple to perform and easy to interpret. It requires testing of both cefotaxime (30-μg) and ceftazidime (30-μg) disks each alone and in combination with clavulanic acid (10 μg). An increase in the zone diameter of ≥5 mm for either antimicrobial agent tested in combination with clavulanic acid over that when tested alone indicates that the isolate is an ESBL producer. However, as clavulanic acid is labile, it is recommended that the disks be used immediately after preparation and that they not be stored (3). This may be an inconvenience for many clinical laboratories. Therefore, we evaluated the stability of disks containing clavulanic acid stored at −20°C for 14 consecutive days.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".