MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127766426 · doi:10.14740/jmc3645

<i>Gardnerella vaginalis</i> Is a Rare Cause of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Case Report and Literature Review

2021· article· en· W3127766426 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Younes Ait Tamlihat, Pierre Frédéric Augereau, Gilles Lardillon, Jérémie Violette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGardnerella vaginalisMedicineMetronidazoleBacterial vaginosisPneumoniaCefotaximeVaginal floraIntensive care unitAntibioticsInternal medicineMicrobiologyGynecologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gardnerella vaginalis ( G. vaginalis ) is a commensal bacterium of the vaginal flora, facultative anerobic with Gram-variable, frequently implicated in cases of vaginosis or even infections of the genitourinary tract, rarely responsible for systemic infections and very exceptionally isolated in bronchopulmonary damage. We report here a case of G. vaginalis pneumonia in a 45-year-old man admitted to the intensive care unit for cardiorespiratory arrest (CRA) by hanging, whose course was unfavorable following severe post-anoxic encephalopathy. During his hospitalization, the patient presented ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) with identification of G. vaginalis at a significant threshold on the protected distal bronchial sampling (PDBS). Antibiotic therapy with cefotaxime and metronidazole had a good response to this infection. In this observation, we discuss the pathogenic role and identification of G. vaginalis at the pulmonary level. J Med Cases. 2021;12(4):134-137 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3645

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207