Longitudinal Multicenter Analysis of Outcomes After Cessation of Control Measures for Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess clinically relevant outcomes after complete cessation of control measures for vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). DESIGN Quasi-experimental ecological study over 3.5 years. METHODS All VRE screening and isolation practices at 4 large academic hospitals in Ontario, Canada, were stopped on July 1, 2012. In total, 618 anonymized abstracted charts of patients with VRE-positive clinical isolates identified between July 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, were reviewed to determine whether the case was a true VRE infection, a VRE colonization or contaminant, or a true VRE bacteremia. All deaths within 30 days of the last VRE infection were also reviewed to determine whether the death was fully or partially attributable to VRE. All-cause mortality was evaluated over the study period. Generalized estimating equation methods were used to cluster outcome rates within hospitals, and negative binomial models were created for each outcome. RESULTS The incidence rate ratio (IRR) for VRE infections was 0.59 and the associated P value was .34. For VRE bacteremias, the IRR was 0.54 and P=.38; for all-cause mortality the IRR was 0.70 and P=.66; and for VRE attributable death, the IRR was 0.35 and P=.49. VRE control measures were not significantly associated with any of the outcomes. Rates of all outcomes appeared to increase during the 18-month period after cessation of VRE control measures, but none reached statistical significance. CONCLUSION Clinically significant VRE outcomes remain rare. Cessation of all control measures for VRE had no significant attributable adverse clinical impact. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1-7.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".