MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970698892 · doi:10.1128/aac.01538-07

Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens in Intensive Care Units in Canada: Results of the Canadian National Intensive Care Unit (CAN-ICU) Study, 2005-2006

2008· article· en· W1970698892 on OpenAlexaffabout
George G. Zhanel, Mel DeCorby, Nancy M. Laing, Barb Weshnoweski, Ravi Vashisht, Franil Tailor, Kim Nichol, Aleksandra Wierzbowski, Patricia J. Baudry, James A. Karlowsky, Philippe Lagacé‐Wiens, Andrew Walkty, Melissa McCracken, Michael R. Mulvey, Jack Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobiologyLinezolidTigecyclineEnterococcus faeciumClindamycinEnterococcusStaphylococcus aureusMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusMedicineStreptococcus pneumoniaeVancomycinBiologyAntimicrobialAntibioticsBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between 1 September 2005 and 30 June 2006, 19 medical centers collected 4,180 isolates recovered from clinical specimens from patients in intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada. The 4,180 isolates were collected from 2,292 respiratory specimens (54.8%), 738 blood specimens (17.7%), 581 wound/tissue specimens (13.9%), and 569 urinary specimens (13.6%). The 10 most common organisms isolated from 79.5% of all clinical specimens were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (16.4%), Escherichia coli (12.8%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10.0%), Haemophilus influenzae (7.9%), coagulase-negative staphylococci/Staphylococcus epidermidis (6.5%), Enterococcus spp. (6.1%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (5.8%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (5.8%), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (4.7%), and Enterobacter cloacae (3.9%). MRSA made up 22.3% (197/884) of all S. aureus isolates (90.9% of MRSA were health care-associated MRSA, and 9.1% were community-associated MRSA), while vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) made up 6.7% (11/255) of all enterococcal isolates (88.2% of VRE had the vanA genotype). Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae occurred in 3.5% (19/536) and 1.8% (4/224) of isolates, respectively. All 19 ESBL-producing E. coli isolates were PCR positive for CTX-M, with bla CTX-M-15 occurring in 74% (14/19) of isolates. For MRSA, no resistance against daptomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, and vancomycin was observed, while the resistance rates to other agents were as follows: clarithromycin, 89.9%; clindamycin, 76.1%; fluoroquinolones, 90.1 to 91.8%; and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 11.7%. For E. coli, no resistance to amikacin, meropenem, and tigecycline was observed, while resistance rates to other agents were as follows: cefazolin, 20.1%; cefepime, 0.7%; ceftriaxone, 3.7%; gentamicin, 3.0%; fluoroquinolones, 21.1%; piperacillin-tazobactam, 1.9%; and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, 24.8%. Resistance rates for P. aeruginosa were as follows: amikacin, 2.6%; cefepime, 10.2%; gentamicin, 15.2%; fluoroquinolones, 23.8 to 25.5%; meropenem, 13.6%; and piperacillin-tazobactam, 9.3%. A multidrug-resistant (MDR) phenotype (resistance to three or more of the following drugs: cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, amikacin or gentamicin, and ciprofloxacin) occurred frequently in P. aeruginosa (12.6%) but uncommonly in E. coli (0.2%), E. cloacae (0.6%), or K. pneumoniae (0%). In conclusion, S. aureus (MSSA and MRSA), E. coli, P. aeruginosa, H. influenzae, Enterococcus spp., S. pneumoniae, and K. pneumoniae are the most common isolates recovered from clinical specimens in Canadian ICUs. A MDR phenotype is common for P. aeruginosa isolates in Canadian ICUs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations271
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapySame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207