MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981284053 · doi:10.1159/000221938

Relationships between in vitro Susceptibility and Efficacy in Experimental Mouse Infection-Protection Assay of Cefazolin and Cephalothin using Escherichia coli Strains

2009· article· en· W1981284053 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemotherapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy
Canadian institutionsSmiths Detection (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCefazolinCephalosporinEscherichia coliMicrobiologyMinimum inhibitory concentrationIn vitroED50BiologyEnterobacteriaceaeStaphylococcus aureusBacteriaAntibioticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The disc sensitivity and minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of cefazolin and cephalothin were compared against a series of Escherichia coli isolates. These data were correlated with the mouse protective doses of the 2 cephalosporins in animals infected with E. coli strains selected according to their various degrees of in vitro sensitivity to the 2 cephalosporins. The overwhelming majority of E. coli strains showed a significantly higher degree of susceptibility and lower MIC values for cefazolin than for cephalothin. There has been found a good correlation between the inhibition zones and especially the MIC values and the ED50 results for both cephalosporins. Using E. coli clinical isolates, cefazolin was found to be superior to cephalothin not only in vitro experiments but also more potent in protecting the experimentally infected mice.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.276 · 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