Susceptibility of <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> to Fusidic Acid: Canadian Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ongoing antimicrobial surveillance is important to ensure proper management of infectious diseases. There are inherent issues in estimating the relevant incidence of antimicrobial resistance from surveillance data and special issues for topical preparations. OBJECTIVE: To perform semiannual surveillance of fusidic acid susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus strains in a Canadian tertiary care hospital. METHODS: S. aureus strains were collected twice yearly from routine cultures. Routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by an automated method. Fusidic acid susceptibility testing was performed by disk diffusion. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2005, 2,302 S. aureus strains were tested, of which 240 were methicillin resistant (MRSA). Among all strains tested, 65 (2.8%) were resistant to fusidic acid. Ten of the MRSA strains (4.2%) were resistant to fusidic acid. Although from different patients, these were shown to be part of a hospital outbreak and were epidemiologically linked. CONCLUSIONS: There has been no trend toward increasing fusidic acid resistance in our hospital over this period.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".