MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085273390 · doi:10.1089/sur.2007.010

Pharmacoeconomics of Ciprofloxacin plus Metronidazole vs. Piperacillin-Tazobactam for Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections

2008· article· en· W2085273390 on OpenAlex
Joseph A. Paladino, Kristin K. Gilliland-Johnson, Martin H. Adelman, Stephen M. Cohn

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Infections · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePiperacillin/tazobactamMetronidazoleCiprofloxacinPiperacillinTazobactamInternal medicinePharmacoeconomicsCost effectivenessAntibioticsSurgeryIntensive care medicineImipenemAntibiotic resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A series of 459 hospitalized adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections participated in a randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial. The present study was conducted to add a pharmacoeconomic analysis to the results. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the hospital provider was carried out. Decision analysis was used to illustrate outcomes and to provide a basis on which to conduct a sensitivity analysis. Cost-effectiveness ratios, representing the cost per expected successfully treated patient, were calculated to determine the most cost-effective alternative. RESULTS: Among 244 economically evaluable patients, enrolled from 34 centers in the U.S. and Canada, 131 patients received ciprofloxacin-metronidazole (75% clinical success rate), and 113 received piperacillin-tazobactam (65% clinical success rate; p = 0.06). Switch to oral antibiotics was possible for 81 patients who received ciprofloxacin-metronidazole (85% clinical success rate) and 67 piperacillin-tazobactam patients (70% clinical success rate; p = 0.027). The mean hospital cost was US$10,662 +/- 7,793 for patients in the ciprofloxacin-metronidazole group and $10,009 +/- 7,023 for patients in the piperacillin-tazobactam group (p = 0.492). Significantly lower costs were documented for patients who could be switched to oral antibiotics than for those continued on intravenous antibiotic orders ($8,684 +/- 4,120 vs. $12,945 +/- 10,204, respectively; p < 0.001). Patients with appendicitis had lower mean hospital costs than those with other infections ($7,169 +/- 3,705 vs. $12,097 +/- 8,342, respectively; p < 0.001). The cost-effectiveness ratios were $14,216:1 for patients in the ciprofloxacin-metronidazole group and $15,398:1 for patients in the piperacillin-tazobactam group. CONCLUSIONS: The mean hospital costs associated with ciprofloxacin-metronidazole were similar to those of piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Lower costs were documented for patients able to be switched to oral antibiotics and for patients with appendicitis.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.297 · 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