MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132436325

Which antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines for infective endocarditis should Canadian dentists follow?

2007· article· en· W2132436325 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hervé Sroussi, Ashwin R. Prabhu, Joel B. Epstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfective endocarditisMedicineAntibiotic prophylaxisAntibioticsEndocarditisIntensive care medicineInternal medicineMicrobiologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dental providers must keep up to date with antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines for infectious endocarditis (IE) as these guidelines represent standards of care and determine medicolegal standards. A survey of Canadian dentists revealed that practi-tioners tend to employ antibiotic prophylaxis according to the guidelines in place at the time of their graduation from dental school — guidelines that often do not meet the cur-rent standards,1 as both the American Heart Association (AHA)2 and the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC)3 have currently updated their recommendations. Host factors that increase the risk of IE include specific cardiac abnormalities, a previous episode of IE and the extent of the

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207