IS BACTERIOLOGY A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IN UNSALVAGEABLE NATURE OF DIABETIC FOOT INFECTIONS?–A STUDY IN A DISTRICT HOSPITAL IN MALAYSIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The objective is to study bacterial pathogens isolated in diabetic foot infection (DFI) and their sensitivity pattern to antibiotics commonly used in the management of DFI in the salvageable and unsalvageable groups of patients in a district hospital. Methods: 122 patients with diabetic limb infections treated at the Orthopedic Department of Hospital Sultan Abdul Halim, Sungai Petani, Kedah State in Malaysia. Clinically, limb infections were classified as salvageable and unsalvageable infections. Salvageable - mild, superficial/deep, localized ulcer with no systemic derangements necessitating conservative treatment or surgical procedures with minor amputations of limb (toe/ray amputation). Unsalvageable-deep seated extensive or spreading ulcers threatening the integrity of limb with or without toxic symptoms or metabolic derangement and could result in major limb amputation. A standard questionnaire was used to collect demographic, clinical and microbiological details of patients in both groups. Co-morbid illnesses, type/severity of limb infection during presentation and results of routine blood investigations were recorded. Details of nature of each specimen, species of isolate pathogen and sensitivity pattern to antibiotic of each clinical isolates were recorded. Results: 62 and 60 patients respectively belonged to the salvageable and unsalvageable groups. Only 11.66% presented with evidence of toxemia in the unsalvageable group. ESBL was the commonest nosocomial organisms. Percentage of organism sensitivity was most to vancomycin, ceftazidime, and gentamicin. Conclusion: All severe infections do not present with toxemia in diabetic patients. Gram-negative organisms were predominant in both groups although Staphylococcal organisms were the single largest group in the unsalvageable group. 3 rd generation antibiotics are more useful in its control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".