How Introducing a Registry With Automated Alerts for Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) May Help Control CRE Spread in a Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regions are considering the use of electronic registries to track patients who carry antibiotic-resistant bacteria, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Implementing such a registry can be challenging and requires time, effort, and resources; therefore, there is a need to better understand the potential impact. METHODS: We developed an agent-based model of all inpatient healthcare facilities (90 acute care hospitals, 9 long-term acute care hospitals, 351 skilled nursing facilities, and 12 ventilator-capable skilled nursing facilities) in the Chicago metropolitan area, surrounding communities, and patient flow using our Regional Healthcare Ecosystem Analyst software platform. Scenarios explored the impact of a registry that tracked patients carrying CRE to help guide infection prevention and control. RESULTS: When all Illinois facilities participated (n = 402), the registry reduced the number of new carriers by 11.7% and CRE prevalence by 7.6% over a 3-year period. When 75% of the largest Illinois facilities participated (n = 304), registry use resulted in a 11.6% relative reduction in new carriers (16.9% and 1.2% in participating and nonparticipating facilities, respectively) and 5.0% relative reduction in prevalence. When 50% participated (n = 201), there were 10.7% and 5.6% relative reductions in incident carriers and prevalence, respectively. When 25% participated (n = 101), there was a 9.1% relative reduction in incident carriers (20.4% and 1.6% in participating and nonparticipating facilities, respectively) and 2.8% relative reduction in prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing an extensively drug-resistant organism registry reduced CRE spread, even when only 25% of the largest Illinois facilities participated due to patient sharing. Nonparticipating facilities garnered benefits, with reductions in new carriers.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".