Global resilience and new strategies needed for antimicrobial stewardship during the COVID‐19 pandemic and beyond
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resilience is having the ability to respond to adversity proactively and resourcefully. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic's profound impact on antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) requires clinicians to call on their own resilience to manage the demands of the pandemic and the disruption of ASP activities. This article provides examples of ASP resilience from pharmacists and physicians from seven countries with different resources and approaches to ASP-The United States, The United Kingdom, Canada, Nigeria, Lebanon, South Africa, and Colombia. The lessons learned pertain to providing ASP clinical services in the context of a global pandemic, developing new ASP paradigms in the face of COVID-19, leveraging technology to extend the reach of ASP, and conducting international collaborative ASP research remotely. This article serves as an example of how resilience and global collaboration is sustaining our ASPs by sharing new "how to" do antimicrobial stewardship practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it