Development of a national neonatal intensive care unit-specific antimicrobial stewardship programme in Canada: protocol for a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early empiric treatment with broad-spectrum antimicrobials is common in neonatal intensive care units (NICU) due to the non-specific clinical presentation of infection. However, excessive and inappropriate antimicrobial use can lead to the emergence of drug-resistant organisms and adverse neonatal outcomes. This study aims to develop and implement a nationwide NICU-specific antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP) to promote judicious antimicrobial use and control the emergence of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in Canada. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our study population will include all very low-birth-weight neonates admitted to participating tertiary NICU in Canada. Based on the existing limited literature, we will develop consensus on NICU antimicrobial stewardship interventions to enhance best practices. Using an expanded Canadian Neonatal Network (CNN) platform, we will collect data on antimicrobial use and the susceptibility of organisms identified in clinical samples from blood and cerebrospinal fluid over a period of 2 years. These data will be used to provide all NICU stakeholders with benchmarked centre-adjusted antimicrobial use and MDRO prevalence reports. An ASP plan will be developed at both individual unit and national levels in the subsequent years. Knowledge translation strategies will be implemented through the well-established Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality methodology. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics for the study has been granted by the University of British Columbia Children's & Women's Research Ethics Board (H19-02490) and supported by CNN Executive Committee. The study results will be disseminated through national organisations and open access peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04388293.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".