Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expert committees on bacterial endocarditis prophylaxis have provided differing opinions on whether tracheal intubation is an 'at-risk' manipulation. We studied the incidence of bacteraemia after orotracheal and nasotracheal intubation. The study group comprised 110 patients who underwent surgery under general anaesthesia. Venous blood samples were collected from each patient at baseline and 30 s after intubation. Samples were processed with conventional microbiological techniques. Bacteraemia after tracheal intubation was detected in 13 patients (11.8%); six after orotracheal intubation and seven after nasotracheal intubation. Staphylococci and streptococci were the most commonly isolated bacterial species. Seven isolates (54%) were resistant to oxacillin. The incidence of bacteraemia was similar after orotracheal (12.0%) and nasotracheal intubation (11.7%). The recommendation for bacterial endocarditis prophylaxis with flucloxacillin when performing nasotracheal intubation, as put forward by the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, needs further consideration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 |
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".