MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1889197325 · doi:10.1093/ajhp/57.4.339

Cost-effectiveness analysis of six strategies for cardiovascular surgery prophylaxis in patients labeled penicillin allergic

2000· article· en· W1889197325 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Phillips, Marie Louie, Simon R. Knowles, Andrew E. Simor, Paul Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug-Induced Adverse Reactions
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCefazolinPenicillinMedicineVancomycinAnaphylaxisAntibioticsAnesthesiaAllergySurgeryImmunologyMicrobiologyStaphylococcus aureus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cost-effectiveness of different approaches to antimicrobial prophylaxis for cardiovascular surgery patients labeled penicillin allergic was studied. A decision-analytic model was used to examine the cost-effectiveness of six strategies for antimicrobial prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery patients at a tertiary care hospital. The strategies consisted of (1) giving vancomycin to all patients labeled penicillin allergic, (2) giving cefazolin to all patients labeled penicillin allergic, (3) giving vancomycin to all patients with a history suggesting an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated reaction to penicillin and cefazolin to patients without such a history, (4) administering a penicillin skin test to patients with a history suggesting an IgE-mediated reaction to penicillin and giving vancomycin to patients with positive results and cefazolin to all others, (5) skin testing all patients labeled penicillin allergic and giving vancomycin to those with positive results and cefazolin to those with negative results, regardless of history, and (6) skin testing all patients and giving vancomycin to those with positive results or a history suggesting an IgE-mediated reaction to penicillin and cefazolin to all others. Giving cefazolin to all patients labeled penicillin allergic was the least expensive strategy but was associated with the highest rate of both anaphylactic and non-life-threatening serious reactions. Selective use of vancomycin in patients with a history suggesting an IgE-mediated reaction to penicillin was associated with an added cost and a slightly lower rate of anaphylaxis. Although skin-testing strategies may decrease both non-life-threatening and anaphylactic reactions, the incremental cost was high. When vancomycin was given to all patients labeled penicillin allergic, the incremental cost was very high. A decision-analytic model indicated that selective use of vancomycin is more cost-effective than indiscriminate use of vancomycin for surgical prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery patients labeled penicillin allergic.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Health-System PharmacySame topicDrug-Induced Adverse ReactionsFrench-language works237,207