Automated Cluster Detection of Health Care–Associated Infection Based on the Multisource Surveillance of Process Data in the Area Network: Retrospective Study of Algorithm Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The cluster detection of health care-associated infections (HAIs) is crucial for identifying HAI outbreaks in the early stages. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to verify whether multisource surveillance based on the process data in an area network can be effective in detecting HAI clusters. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the incidence of HAIs and 3 indicators of process data relative to infection, namely, antibiotic utilization rate in combination, inspection rate of bacterial specimens, and positive rate of bacterial specimens, from 4 independent high-risk units in a tertiary hospital in China. We utilized the Shewhart warning model to detect the peaks of the time-series data. Subsequently, we designed 5 surveillance strategies based on the process data for the HAI cluster detection: (1) antibiotic utilization rate in combination only, (2) inspection rate of bacterial specimens only, (3) positive rate of bacterial specimens only, (4) antibiotic utilization rate in combination + inspection rate of bacterial specimens + positive rate of bacterial specimens in parallel, and (5) antibiotic utilization rate in combination + inspection rate of bacterial specimens + positive rate of bacterial specimens in series. We used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Youden index to evaluate the warning performance of these surveillance strategies for the detection of HAI clusters. RESULTS: The ROC curves of the 5 surveillance strategies were located above the standard line, and the area under the curve of the ROC was larger in the parallel strategy than in the series strategy and the single-indicator strategies. The optimal Youden indexes were 0.48 (95% CI 0.29-0.67) at a threshold of 1.5 in the antibiotic utilization rate in combination-only strategy, 0.49 (95% CI 0.45-0.53) at a threshold of 0.5 in the inspection rate of bacterial specimens-only strategy, 0.50 (95% CI 0.28-0.71) at a threshold of 1.1 in the positive rate of bacterial specimens-only strategy, 0.63 (95% CI 0.49-0.77) at a threshold of 2.6 in the parallel strategy, and 0.32 (95% CI 0.00-0.65) at a threshold of 0.0 in the series strategy. The warning performance of the parallel strategy was greater than that of the single-indicator strategies when the threshold exceeded 1.5. CONCLUSIONS: The multisource surveillance of process data in the area network is an effective method for the early detection of HAI clusters. The combination of multisource data and the threshold of the warning model are 2 important factors that influence the performance of the model.
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 | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".