MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146788195 · doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1339-6

Management of invasive candidiasis and candidemia in adult non-neutropenic intensive care unit patients: Part II. Treatment

2008· review· en· W2146788195 on OpenAlexaff
Benoît Guéry, Maiken Cavling Arendrup, Georg Auzinger, Élie Azoulay, Márcio Borges Sá, Elizabeth M. Johnson, E. Müller, Christian Putensen, Coleman Rotstein, Gabriele Sganga, Mario Venditti, Rafael Zaragoza, Bart Jan Kullberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluconazoleMedicineIntensive care medicineIntensive care unitInvasive candidiasisAnesthesiologyFungemiaAzoleAntifungalEmpiric therapyIntensive careNeutropeniaInternal medicineChemotherapyAnesthesiaDermatologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Invasive candidiasis and candidemia are frequently encountered in the nosocomial setting particularly in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: To review the current management of invasive candidiasis and candidemia in non-neutropenic adult ICU patients based on a review of the literature and an European expert panel discussion. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Empiric and directed treatment for invasive candidiasis are predicated on the hemodynamic status of the patient. Unstable patients may benefit from broad-spectrum antifungal agents, which can be narrowed once the patient has stabilized and the identity of the infecting species is established. In stable patients, a more classical approach using fluconazole may be satisfactory provided that the patient is not colonized with fluconazole resistant strains or there has been recent past exposure to an azole (<30 days). In contrast, pre-emptive therapy is based on the presence of surrogate markers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.293 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations115
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care MedicineSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207