Validation of a Dosage Individualization Table for Extended-Interval Gentamicin in Neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extended-interval aminoglycoside dosing is increasingly used in neonates; however, guidance on how to monitor concentrations and adjust dosages accordingly is limited. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively validate the use of a 22-hour gentamicin concentration dosing table for the individualization of extended-interval dosing in the neonatal population by examining the peak and trough concentrations achieved through its use. METHODS: A prospective observational study was carried out on gentamicin concentrations achieved using a 22-hour post-first-dose gentamicin concentration dosing table for determining dosing intervals in neonates. Neonates (N = 104) in the first week of life, gestational age 23 weeks to full term, in level II and III neonatal intensive care units were included. Neonates were given gentamicin 5 mg/kg intravenously; a table using 22-hour post-first-dose gentamicin concentrations was then used to individualize dosing intervals. Pre- and post-serum gentamicin concentrations on the dosing interval indicated were measured with the second or third doses and used to calculate the peak and trough concentrations achieved. RESULTS: Use of the 22-hour post-first-dose gentamicin concentration dosing table resulted in dosing intervals that provided appropriate peak (mean 10.55 mg/L) and trough (mean 0.75 mg/L) concentrations (with second or third doses) in all neonates. All patients had trough concentrations less than 2 mg/L, and 73% had a trough concentration less than 1 mg/L. No peak concentrations were less than 5 mg/L, 82% of patients had a peak concentration from 5 to 12 mg/L, and the remaining 18% had concentrations from 12.1 to 16 mg/L. Peak and trough concentrations were similar across all gestational ages. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a 22-hour post-first-dose gentamicin concentration dosing table to individualize extended-interval gentamicin dosages in neonates resulted in appropriate peak and trough concentrations in all neonates studied. Use of this table will result in appropriate extended-interval aminoglycoside dosages in neonates early in treatment, using a single serum concentration.
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 | 0.023 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".