MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138573008 · doi:10.1086/376642

Emergence of Levofloxacin-Resistant Pneumococci in Immunocompromised Adults after Therapy for Community-Acquired Pneumonia

2003· article· en· W2138573008 on OpenAlexaff
Kara B. Anderson, James S. Tan, T. M. File, J. R. DiPersio, Barbara Willey, Donald E. Low

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevofloxacinMedicineStreptococcus pneumoniaePneumoniaQuinoloneCommunity-acquired pneumoniaPneumococcal pneumoniaBacteremiaSputumInternal medicineImmunologyAntibioticsMicrobiologyPathologyTuberculosisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe 4 patients infected with levofloxacin-resistant pneumococci after therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The 4 patients had 15 episodes of CAP; Streptococcus pneumoniae was isolated from blood or sputum samples obtained during 14 of the episodes. The underlying medical condition was Bruton agammaglobulinemia in 3 patients and chronic lymphoid leukemia in the other. The initial episode of CAP in each patient was due to a levofloxacin-susceptible strain. One of 4 reinfections and 5 of 6 relapses were due to levofloxacin-resistant strains. All of these strains had amino acid substitutions in the quinolone-resistance-determining region of the genes parC and gyrA. The time between episodes of pneumonia varied from 1 to 4 months. In immunocompromised patients with suspected or proven pneumococcal infection, it may be prudent not to use fluoroquinolone monotherapy empirically when the patient has a history of fluoroquinolone therapy in at least the past 4 months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations99
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicPneumonia and Respiratory InfectionsFrench-language works237,207