MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786692887 · doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2017.12.018

Fluconazole non-susceptible breakthrough candidemia after prolonged low-dose prophylaxis: a prospective FUNGINOS study

2018· article· en· W2786692887 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina Orasch, Dominik Mertz, Jorge Garbino, Christian van Delden, Stéphane Emonet, Jacques Schrenzel, Stefan Zimmerli, Lauro Damonti, Konrad Mühlethaler, Alexander Imhof, Christian Ruef, Jan Fehr, Reinhard Zbinden, Katia Boggian, Thomas Bruderer, Ursula Flückiger, Anna Conen, Nina Khanna, Reno Frei, Thomas Bregenzer, Frédéric Lamoth, Véronique Erard, Pierre–Yves Bochud, Thierry Calandra, Jacques Billé, Oscar Marchetti, Ulrich Heininger, Mario Franciolli, Madeleine Rothen, Claudine Zellweger, Philip Tarr, Felix Fleisch, Christian Chuard, Daniel Genné, Jean‐Philippe Chave, Peter Gräber, R Monotti, Enos Bernasconi, Marco Rossi, Martín Krause, Rein-Jan Piso, Frank Bally, Nicolas Troillet, Gerhard Eich, Jacques Gubler, Christoph Berger, Hans Fankhauser, I Heinzer, Roland Hertel, Marisa Dolina, Orlando Petrini, Olivier Dubuis, Suzanne Graf, Martin Risch, Eva Ritzler, Dominique Fracheboud, Peter Rohner, Reto Lienhardt, Corinne Andreutti-Zaugg, Alberto Gallusser, Gaby E. Pfyffer, Karin Herzog, Urs Schibli, Lysiane Tissière, D. Schultze

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infection · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMerck Sharp and DohmeMerckFondation LeenaardsGilead SciencesNovartisHamilton Health Sciences FoundationPfizer
KeywordsFluconazoleMedicineCandida glabrataInternal medicineMucositisGastroenterologyCandida kruseiProspective cohort studyFungemiaMycosisSurgeryAntifungalChemotherapyDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of InfectionSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207