Predictive value of Candida colonization index in 131 patients undergoing two different cardiovascular surgical procedures.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nosocomial candidemia is an important infection because of its increasing incidence and its high fatality rate. Candidiasis involves multiple risk factors. In this work, we study the degree of Candida colonization in cardiovascular surgical patients by taking into account the number of sites colonized and the density of growth. METHODS: Eleven (11) selected variables (age, sex, weight, diabetes, number of antibiotics, duration of antibiotics, length of hospitalization, length of stay in surgical intensive care unit, duration of surgery, temperature during surgery, and number of bypass) were considered to predict the perioperative variation of the colonization index (CI) by Candida in 131 cardiovascular surgical patients. These patients were divided into two groups: group A, coronary artery bypass grafting with extracorporeal circulation (72 patients) and group B, coronary artery bypass grafting without extracorporeal circulation (59 patients). RESULTS: One thousand and forty-eight fungal cultures were obtained from four different body sites and 162 isolated were identified. Candida albicans accounted for 74% of the strains in group A and 97% in group B. The statistical analysis (two-way anova) shows that group A patients with an increased CI have received significantly more antibiotics than those with a stable CI (1.50+/-0.83 vs 1.08+/- 0.40, p=0.0055). CONCLUSIONS: Epidemiological data obtained from this study show that coronary artery bypass grafting with extracorporeal circulation procedure is associated with an increase in the use of antibiotics and subsequently a higher risk a Candida colonization-infection.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".