MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974175819 · doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2004.07.008

Demographic analysis of antimicrobial resistance among Streptococcus pneumoniae: worldwide results from PROTEKT 1999–2000

2005· article· en· W1974175819 on OpenAlexaff
Daryl J. Hoban, Fernando Baquero, Vaughan Reed, D. Felmingham

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Infectious Diseases · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreptococcus pneumoniaeAntimicrobialAntibiotic resistanceMicrobiologyMedicineBiologyAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DESIGN: The influence of demographic factors upon antimicrobial resistance among 3362 isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae from 25 countries was investigated, using univariate comparison and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Eleven countries had significantly higher rates (Odds ratios [OR]: 2.50-64.79) of penicillin and/or erythromycin resistance than the UK. After taking country effects into account, rates of penicillin resistance (OR 1.98) and erythromycin resistance (OR 1.89) were significantly higher among infants than adults. Fewer (OR 0.69) erythromycin-resistant isolates were collected from male than female patients. There was no difference in the incidence of penicillin or erythromycin resistance among inpatients or outpatients. Penicillin resistance was more prevalent among ear swabs than blood cultures (OR 2.07). Erm(B), the predominant macrolide resistance mechanism across all age groups, was particularly prevalent among bronchoalveolar lavage (69.1%) and sinus (68.8%) isolates. Isolates possessing both erm(B) and mef(A) were generally collected from South Korea and were most common among infants and children (10.3%) and ear samples (17.3%). Telithromycin susceptibility was >99.5%, irrespective of demography. CONCLUSIONS: Although demography had a significant impact on antimicrobial resistance of pneumococci, telithromycin remained highly active across all demographic groups.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Infectious DiseasesSame topicPneumonia and Respiratory InfectionsFrench-language works237,207