MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884751395 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v52i4.1822

A Review of Bacterial Endocarditis and the Current Recommendations for Its Prevention

2018· review· en· W2884751395 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heather Wieler, Sheryl Zelenitsky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndocarditisBacterial endocarditisAntibiotic prophylaxisGynecologyIncidence (geometry)Intensive care medicineInfective endocarditisBacteremiaAntibioticsInternal medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Bacterial endocarditis is a rare but serious infectious disease for which prevention, specifically antibiotic prophylaxis, is important. In June 1997, the American Heart Association published revised recommendations for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis. Despite the existence of these guidelines, surveys of health-care practitioners and patients have demonstrated a significant lack of knowledge of important issues regarding antibiotic prophylaxis of bacterial endocarditis. The purpose of this article is to give pharmacists the information required to educate other health-care practitioners and patients about the appropriate use of antibiotic prophylaxis for this condition. The article reviews the incidence, pathophysiology, and clinical presentation of bacterial endocarditis and outlines the current recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis. The risk factors for bacterial endocarditis, including cardiac conditions and procedures that cause bacteremia, are reviewed. The indications for antibiotic prophylaxis, based on the relative benefits and risks, are also discussed. RESUME L'endocardite bacterienne est une infection rare, mais grave pour laquelle la prevention, particulierement l'antibiotherapie prophylactique, est importante. En juin 1997, l'American Heart Association a publie des recommandations revisees pour la prevention de l'endocardite bacterienne. Malgre l'existence de ces lignes directrices, des sondages aupres des professionnels de la sante et des patients ont demontre un manque considerable de connaissances des problemes touchant l'antibiotherapie prophylactique. Le but de cet article est de donner au pharmacien l'information necessaire pour informer les autres professionnels de la sante et les patients sur la pertinence de l'antibiotherapie prophylactique dans l'endocardite bacterienne. L'article analyse l'incidence, la pathophysiologie, et la manifestation clinique de l'endocardite bacterienne, et souligne les recommandations actuelles en termes d'antibiotherapie prophylactique. Les facteurs de risque d'endocardite bacterienne, y compris les etats de sante et les interventions qui causent une bacteriemie sont etudies. Les indications pour l'antibiotherapie prophylactique, fondees sur les avantages et les risques relatifs, sont aussi passees en revue.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207