MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246154896 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofu052.566

858Evaluation of Current Methods for the Diagnosis of Catheter-Related Blood Stream Infections (CRBSI) at the Hospital for Sick Children

2014· article· en· W2246154896 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Khan, Susan E. Richardson, Michelle Science

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood streamSick childIntensive care medicineCurrent (fluid)PediatricsCatheterEmergency medicineInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Central-line associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality for critically ill and immunocompromised patients. The diagnosis can be challenging in children, as prophylactic antibiotics are often started prior to cultures. The purpose of this study was to review the value of catheter tip cultures in diagnosing CLABSI in children and to determine whether alternative laboratory methods of diagnosis might be indicated. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of all semi-quantitative catheter tip cultures from 2010–11. All blood culture data in the preceding two weeks were reviewed to determine their predictive value for CLABSI. Central lines that had a second culture (peripheral or other central line culture) taken within 24h of each other were analyzed separately as a pair. A survey of HCP (physicians and nurse practitioners) on the diagnosis of CLABSI in children with central lines was conducted. Results. A total of 274 catheter tips were cultured from 237 patients. The majority of patients had cultures performed in the preceding two weeks (87%). Positive tips cultures were obtained in 13% (n = 35); 28 (80%) had a preceding blood culture with the same organism. Of those patients, 86% (n = 24) had a set of paired cultures sent. Analysis of tip cultures is outlined in the figure, and paired cultures are described further in the table. The survey was distributed to 300 people, with a 25% response rate. Respondents felt line removal had significant clinical impact. Respondents were generally in agreement with IDSA guidelines on indications for line removal. Analysis of tip cultures, and paired cultures. Analysis of positive line tips and negative line tips Conclusion. Our current methods of diagnosis are not adequate for the diagnosis of CLABSI, further research is needed to assess other techniques (i.e., differential time to positivity). Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207