Resistance profile to antimicrobial agents in the main circulating bacteria isolated from acute periodontal and endodontic infections in Latin America (MICROBE- DENT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance is currently considered the main risk to global health. A variety of microbial species have been isolated from endodontic and periodontal infections. However, clinical endodontic and periodontics bacterial isolates have not been sufficiently characterized with regard to their capacity for antibiotic resistance. We aim to assess the existing evidence to estimate the prevalence of the main antimicrobial resistance and multidrug resistant organisms in endodontics and periodontics and to describe their geographic distribution in Latin America. METHODS: All types of designs and will be restricted to Latin American studies will be included in this systematic review. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, BVS (LILACS, BBO - bvsalud.org), IBECS (bases.bireme.br), Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases will be searched from 2013 to December 31, 2018 for all types of study designs that report microbial infection in endodontics and periodontics and their resistance and that define the microbiological methods used to identify microorganisms. The selection of articles for inclusion will be performed by 2 reviewers using predefined eligibility criteria. The Cochrane and ROBINS-I risk of bias assessment tools will be used to assess the methodological quality of randomized control trials. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale will be used to assess the quality of methodology in observational studies. The overall quality of evidence will be assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) using the same principles and domains applied in the quality assessment of prognostic studies. The heterogeneity of the findings will be assessed using both the χ test and the I statistic. Sensitivity analysis will be performed by subgroup analyses and meta-regression to investigate the effect of study-level characteristics, such as age, gender, and methodological quality score, whenever possible. Publication bias across studies will be evaluated by visual inspection of the funnel plots and Begg's test for the results covered in 10 or more studies. RESULTS: The evidence derived by this study will inform best practices for patients with endodontic and periodontal problems receiving antimicrobial agents. CONCLUSION: Successful completion will significantly impact clinical practice and contribute to improved prescribing competency. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42018077810.
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 | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".