MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507626597 · doi:10.1071/ma16037

Antibiotic resistance associated with aquaculture in Vietnam

2016· article· en· W2507626597 on OpenAlexaff
Hoang Nam Kha Nguyen, Thi Thu Hao Van, Peter J. Coloe

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology Australia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquacultureVietnameseAntibiotic resistanceBusinessAgricultureAntibioticsGovernment (linguistics)BiotechnologyFish <Actinopterygii>Resistance (ecology)FisheryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fishery sector is an important source of income, employment and food supply in Vietnam. In 2014, Vietnam was ranked the world's fourth largest exporter and the third largest producer of farmed foodfish. Vietnam seafood export has attained the value of over US$6.0 billion since 2011 and reached a peak of US$7.9 billion in 2014. However, many problems and diseases confront sustainable development of the fishery sector and overuse of antibiotics is considered a major challenge. Antibiotics are used in aquaculture for both therapeutic and prophylactic reasons. Various antimicrobials used in human medicine are also used for food animals even for non-therapeutic use. The use of antibiotics in health management of aquaculture farming is of great concern due to possible residues in aquatic products and in the development of antibiotic resistance. In 2005 the Vietnamese government first promulgated a list of medicines, chemicals and antibiotics that are banned or limited for use in aquaculture and this is regularly updated and amended to tackle the growing problem of antibiotic resistance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology AustraliaSame topicAquaculture disease management and microbiotaFrench-language works237,207