MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529866723 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20160074

Pathogens and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles in critically ill patients with bloodstream infections: a descriptive study

2016· article· en· W2529866723 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Richard Savage, Rob Fowler, Asgar Rishu, Sean M. Bagshaw, DJ Cook, Peter Dodek, Richard Hall, François Lamontagne, François Lauzier, John C. Marshall, Claudio M. Martin, Lauren M. McIntyre, John Muscedere, Steven Reynolds, Henry T. Stelfox, Nick Daneman

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalOttawa HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of CalgarySunnybrook Health Science CentreWestern University
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsCritically illBloodstream infectionMedicineIntensive care medicineAntimicrobialDescriptive researchMicrobiologyBiologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance is vital to guiding empirical treatment of infections. Collating and reporting routine data on clinical isolate testing may offer more timely information about resistance patterns than traditional surveillance network methods. Methods: Using routine microbiology testing data collected from the Bacteremia Antibiotic Length Actually Needed for Clinical Effectiveness retrospective cohort study, we conducted a descriptive secondary analysis among critically ill patients in whom bloodstream infections had been diagnosed in 14 intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada. The participating sites were located within tertiary care teaching hospitals and represented 6 provinces and 10 cities. More than 80% of the study population was accrued from 2011-2013. We assessed the epidemiologic features of the infections and corresponding antimicrobial susceptibility profiles. Susceptibility testing was done according to Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines at accredited laboratories. Results: A total of 1416 pathogens were isolated from 1202 patients. The most common organisms were Escherichia coli (217 isolates [15.3%]), Staphylococcus aureus (175 [12.4%]), coagulase-negative staphylococci (117 [8.3%]), Klebsiella pneumoniae (86 [6.1%]) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (85 [6.0%]). The contribution of individual pathogens varied by site. For 13 ICUs, gram-negative susceptibility rates were high for carbapenems (95.4%), tobramycin (91.2%) and piperacillin-tazobactam (90.0%); however, the proportion of specimens susceptible to these agents ranged from 75.0%-100%, 66.7%-100% and 75.0%-100%, respectively, across sites. Fewer gram-negative bacteria were susceptible to fluoroquinolones (84.5% [range 64.1%-97.2%]). A total of 145 patients (12.1%) had infections caused by highly resistant microorganisms, with significant intersite variation (range 2.6%-24.0%, χ2 = 57.50, p < 0.001). Interpretation: We assessed the epidemiologic features of bloodstream infections in a geographically diverse cohort of critically ill Canadian patients using routine pathogen and susceptibility data extracted from readily available microbiology testing databases. Expanding data sharing across more ICUs, with serial measurement and prompt reporting, could provide much-needed guidance for empiric treatment for patients as well as system-wide prevention methods to limit antimicrobial 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207