Analysing the trend over time of antibiotic consumption in the community: a tutorial on the detection of common change-points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This tutorial describes and illustrates statistical methods to detect time trends possibly including abrupt changes (referred to as change-points) in the consumption of antibiotics in the community. METHODS: For the period 1997-2017, data on consumption of antibacterials for systemic use (ATC group J01) in the community, aggregated at the level of the active substance, were collected using the WHO ATC/DDD methodology and expressed in DDD (ATC/DDD index 2019) per 1000 inhabitants per day. Trends over time and presence of common change-points were studied through a set of non-linear mixed models. RESULTS: After a thorough description of the set of models used to assess the time trend and presence of common change-points herein, the methodology was applied to the consumption of antibacterials for systemic use (ATC J01) in 25 EU/European Economic Area (EEA) countries. The best fit was obtained for a model including two change-points: one in the first quarter of 2004 and one in the last quarter of 2008. CONCLUSIONS: Allowing for the inclusion of common change-points improved model fit. Individual countries investigating changes in their antibiotic consumption pattern can use this tutorial to analyse their country data.
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 | 0.013 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".