MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177189742 · doi:10.3390/idr13030056

Use of Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis to Determine the Source of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

2021· article· en· W3177189742 on OpenAlexaff
Eugene Y. H. Yeung, Ivan Gorn

Bibliographic record

VenueInfectious Disease Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsed-field gel electrophoresisBacteremiaMedicineStaphylococcus aureusMicrobiologyMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusStaphylococcal infectionsBacteriaAntibioticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) has historically been considered the gold standard in fingerprinting bacterial strains in epidemiological studies and outbreak investigations; little is known regarding its use in individual clinical cases. The current study detailed two clinical cases in which PFGE helped to determine the source of their methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia. Patient A was found to have MRSA bacteremia after trauma in her pelvic area. MRSA was also found in her groin but not in her nostril and rectum. PFGE was performed that showed variable bands of her MRSA isolates from blood and groin, suggestive of different strains of MRSA. Her MRSA bacteremia was determined to be unrelated to her pelvic trauma. Patient B was found to have MRSA bacteremia after colonoscopy. MRSA was also found in his nostril and rectum. PFGE was performed that showed variable bands of his MRSA isolates from blood and rectum but identical bands of MRSA isolates from his blood and nostril. His MRSA bacteremia was determined to be unrelated to his colonoscopy procedure. The current study demonstrates the use of PFGE to rule out the source of bacteremia in individual clinical cases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfectious Disease ReportsSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207