Point prevalence survey of antimicrobial utilization in a Canadian tertiary-care teaching hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Inappropriate antimicrobial use can promote antimicrobial resistance, which is associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality. Identifying the pattern of antimicrobial use can provide data from which targeted antimicrobial stewardship interventions can be made. The primary objective was to identify the prevalence of antimicrobial use at a tertiary care teaching hospital with both acute and long-term care patients. METHODS: A point prevalence study was conducted on July 19th, 2012. Data on antimicrobial utilization, indication for prescribing, duration of therapy, and frequency of infectious disease or antimicrobial stewardship consultations were collected using a customized integrated stewardship database (SPIRIT) and prospective chart review. RESULTS: One or more antimicrobial agents were ordered in 31% and 4% of acute care and long-term care patients, respectively. Respiratory and urinary tract infections were the most common indication for antimicrobial therapy in both acute and long-term care. About 25% of surgical prophylaxis orders were prescribed for greater than 24h. CONCLUSION: This prospective point prevalence survey provided important baseline information on antimicrobial use within a large tertiary care teaching hospital and identified potential targets for future antimicrobial stewardship initiatives. A multi-center point prevalence survey should be considered to identify patterns of antimicrobial use in Canada and to establish the first steps toward international antimicrobial surveillance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".