MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002677550 · doi:10.1093/clinchem/48.10.1816

Bailey and Scott’s Diagnostic Microbiology, Eleventh Edition. Betty Forbes, Daniel F. Sahm, and Alice S. Weissfeld. St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 2002, 1069 pp. ISBN 0-323-01678-2.

2002· article· en· W3002677550 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Noble

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEleventhSt louisAlice (programming language)ArtGerontologyHumanitiesMedicineArt historyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bailey and Scott’s Diagnostic Microbiology has been a tradition for medical laboratories for many years. It has carried, for excellent reason, the reputation of being a valuable and essential mainstay for all microbiology trainees regardless of profession. The eleventh edition is similar to the tenth in many respects, with excellent illustrations and tables. Although the textbook appears larger, it is almost identical in number of pages. The discussions of microbiology taxonomy, identification, and pathogenesis issues continue to be covered extremely well. Updates of information are evident in some places, for example, in the section on mailing biohazardous materials, whereas in most areas it remains appropriately unchanged. Occasionally, a review of more information may be appropriate, but on balance the text is excellent, considering the audience for which it is intended. In addition, some new features were added, including a glossary of many terms used within the text and case studies to illustrate some of the chapters. Both of these additions are very helpful and, with future editions, will likely continue to improve. It is noted, for example, that the glossary does not include any reference to antimicrobial sensitivity or susceptibility or resistance. Perhaps future case studies could address topics such as collection and transport of specimens and interpretation of results and reports. If there is a weak part of this book, it is Part 1, “General Issues in Clinical Microbiology”. This area could be substantially expanded and improved. Over the last decade there have been many changes that impact on laboratory practice. With laboratory restructuring and patient care redesign, patients are increasingly further away from the laboratory. It is unrealistic to initiate the brief section on specimen transport with the statement “Ideally specimens should be transported to the laboratory within 30 min of collection”. The impact of specimen transport on the quality of sample result is considerable and requires more complete discussion. In this same vein, the discussions of laboratory management, budgeting, inventory control, interviewing, and job performance are so brief and so incomplete that the space would be better used for other topics. Similarly, the issues in infection control are considerably dated and need a fresh start. Finally, quality management deals exclusively with US laboratories regulated under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act and Amendments. Perhaps future editions of this text might consider addressing the topic on a more international level. That being said, this section represents <10% of the book, and concerns about this section do not override the high quality of the balance of the text. In summary, the eleventh edition of Bailey and Scott’s Diagnostic Microbiology is an excellent text and has much to offer, especially as a primer text for all laboratory students and professionals. It should be considered as an essential text for all laboratory libraries.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.061

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ChemistrySame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207