Perinatal antibiotic usage and changes in colonization and resistance rates of group B streptococcus and other pathogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify current antibiotic usage during the perinatal period and impact on vaginal-rectal colonizing organism resistance rates. METHODS: Swabs were obtained for culture of group B streptococcus and other bacteria from a cohort of 1207 pregnant women in Calgary, Alberta, at 36 weeks' gestation. Those women who received antibiotics during labor or after pregnancy and a 10% subset who received no antibiotics had repeat cultures at 6 weeks postpartum. Cultured organisms were tested for sensitivity to several antibiotics. RESULTS: Group B streptococcus was identified in 235 women (19.5%) in the antepartum period. Fifty-one percent of all participants received antibiotics (31.4% intrapartum). Group B streptococcus prophylaxis was given to 215 (17.8%), whereas 83 (6.9%) group B streptococcus-negative women without fever during labor received antibiotics. Ampicillin (49%), cefazolin (28%), and penicillin (18%) were the most frequently used antibiotics. Resistance rates among group B streptococcus to erythromycin and clindamycin were 5.6% and 3.0%, respectively, whereas 20.6% of Escherichia coli were ampicillin resistant. Among antibiotic recipients, 6.3% of all bacteria that were initially sensitive on prenatal cultures to a specific antibiotic became resistant in the postnatal period, whereas 6.5% that were initially resistant became sensitive. CONCLUSION: Current prevention practices in our region were associated with perinatal antibiotic administration in over half of pregnant women. Ampicillin was the most common antibiotic administered. Some physicians are treating women who are group B streptococcus culture negative at term, a practice that is of no proven value. However, this was not associated with increased resistance for group B streptococcus or other organisms identified from maternal vaginal-rectal tracts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".