Staphylococcus aureus decolonization for recurrent skin and soft tissue infections in children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
QUESTION: I see otherwise healthy children in my practice with recurrent staphylococcal skin infections. While I am comfortable with managing each acute infection, what can be done to eradicate Staphylococcus aureus and reduce the chance of recurrent infections? ANSWER: Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are common in children and are increasing in frequency. Risk factors for the development of staphylococcal SSTIs are colonization with S aureus and recent diagnosis of SSTI in a household member. Current evidence suggests that a combined strategy using hygiene education, nasal mupirocin, and bath washes with chlorhexidine or diluted bleach has the most success in decolonization. However, decolonization appears to only provide temporary reduction in carriage rate. According to the limited research in the ambulatory population, decolonization of a patient does not confer a reduced risk of recurrent infections. Further research and large studies are required to understand the factors in S aureus pathogenesis and whether decolonization of a child and his or her household is of benefit in reducing subsequent S aureus infections.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".