ISOLATION AND GENETIC FINGERPRINTING OF PSEUDOMONAS AERUGINOSA FROM IRANIAN PATIENTS WITH CYSTIC FIBROSIS USING RAPD-PCR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sixty four Iranian patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) were studied for colonization with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The patient’s age ranged between 2 months to 18 years old. Twenty one patients were colonized, 15 with non-mucoid and 6 with mucoid strains of P. aeruginosa. The colonization rate increased with age and the mucoid phenotype was only recovered from the older patients. All mucoid strains came from patients with respiratory disease whereas most of the non-mucoid isolates (n=13) were from patients with gastrointestinal disorder. The antibiograms of the isolates showed 100% sensitivity to Imipenem and Collistin followed by Ciprofloxacin (90.5%), Ceftazidime, and Tobramycin (85.7%), Amikacin, Piperacillin and Tazobactam-Piperacillin (81%), Ticarcillin (76%), Gentamycin (62%), Mezlocillin (52.4%) and Carbenicillin (43%). The MICs for Ceftazidime, Gentamycin and Tobramycin agreed with the disk test results. However, MIC determination for Amikacin showed a 100% sensitivity compared to the disk test where 81% sensitivity was observed. The discrepancy may be due to the fact that over 20% of the isolates had borderline MIC values for Amikacin. The genomic fingerprinting of the 21 isolates as well as the non-mucoid revertants of
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".