MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109147740 · doi:10.1086/598196

Empirical Treatment of Community‐Acquired Pneumonia and the Development of Fluoroquinolone‐Resistant Tuberculosis

2009· article· en· W2109147740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Long, Huey Yi Chong, Vernon Hoeppner, Hareishun Shanmuganathan, Kinga Kowalewska‐Grochowska, Cary Shandro, Jure Manfreda, Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan, Abeer Elzainy, Thomas J. Marrie

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthUniversity of ManitobaCapital District Health AuthorityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisPneumoniaCommunity-acquired pneumoniaIntensive care medicineEmpirical treatmentAntibioticsMicrobiologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND" Fluoroquinolone (FLQ) antibiotics are not uncommonly prescribed for community-acquired pneumonia that is later proven to be pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Such FLQ monotherapy may result in FLQ-resistant pulmonary TB. METHODS: To assess outpatient FLQ use by patients with culture-proven pulmonary TB before diagnosis, TB registries in Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada, were linked with provincial and federal drug benefit plans. To assess FLQ resistance, a case-control study was performed. RESULTS: Of 428 patients with pulmonary TB who were covered by a drug benefit plan, 74 (17.3%) had received > or = 1 FLQ prescription during the 6 months immediately before receipt of the diagnosis. Older patients (age, >64 years) were more likely than younger patients (age, 15-64 years) to be prescribed an FLQ (P < .05). Patients who were prescribed an FLQ received a total of 103 prescriptions. Most (54 [73.0%] of 74) patients who were prescribed an FLQ received a single prescription. Most (69 [67.0%] of 103) FLQ prescriptions were written within 90 days before the diagnosis of pulmonary TB. Patients who were prescribed an FLQ were not statistically significantly more likely than matched patients who were not prescribed an FLQ (control subjects) to be infected with FLQ-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Of 148 isolates of M. tuberculosis from patients and control subjects, 3 were FLQ resistant; all of these isolates were from patients who had received multiple FLQ prescriptions. Patients who had received multiple FLQ prescriptions were more likely than patients who had received a single FLQ prescription to be infected with FLQ-resistant M. tuberculosis (15.0% vs. 0.0%; odds ratio, 11.4; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient FLQ use, ostensibly for community-acquired pneumonia, is not uncommon among patients with pulmonary TB, especially older patients. Single FLQ prescriptions were not associated with FLQ-resistant M. tuberculosis, whereas multiple FLQ prescriptions were associated with FLQ resistance.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations75
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207