Emerging Importance of Multidrug‐Resistant<i>Acinetobacter</i>Species and<i>Stenotrophomonas maltophilia</i>as Pathogens in Seriously Ill Patients: Geographic Patterns, Epidemiological Features, and Trends in the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1997–1999)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, a total of 1078 Acinetobacter species and 842 Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates were collected between January 1997 and December 1999 from 5 geographic regions (Canada, the United States, Latin America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific). The frequency of infections (by geographic region and body site), including those due to imipenem-resistant Acinetobacter species and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ)-resistant S. maltophilia, was evaluated. The possibility of seasonal variations in bloodstream infections caused by Acinetobacter species was studied, as was the activity of several therapeutic antimicrobials against all strains. Acinetobacter species and S. maltophilia were most frequently associated with pulmonary infections, independent of the region evaluated. In contrast, patterns of antimicrobial resistance markedly varied among distinct geographic regions, especially for nosocomial isolates. Although the carbapenems were the most active antimicrobials against Acinetobacter species, nearly 11.0% of the nosocomial isolates were resistant to this drug group in both regions. TMP-SMZ, ticarcillin-clavulanic acid, gatifloxacin, and trovafloxacin were the only agents with consistent therapeutic activity against S. maltophilia isolates. Rates of resistance to TMP-SMZ ranged from 2% in Canada and Latin America to 10% in Europe. The geographic differences in resistance patterns among Acinetobacter species and S. maltophilia isolates observed in this study emphasize the importance of local surveillance in determining the most adequate therapy for acinetobacter and S. maltophilia infections and the possible clonal, epidemic nature of occurrence.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".