MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221096196 · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2022.03.014

Exposure to World Health Organization's AWaRe antibiotics and isolation of multidrug resistant bacteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4221096196 on OpenAlexaff
Giorgia Sulis, Sena Sayood, Shashi Katukoori, Neha Bollam, Ige George, Lauren Yaeger, Miguel A. Chavez, Emmanuel Tetteh, Sindhu Yarrabelli, Céline Pulcini, Stephan Harbarth, Dominik Mertz, Mike Sharland, Lorenzo Moja, Benedikt Huttner, Sumanth Gandra

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Microbiology and Infection · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
FundersWashington University in St. LouisWorld Health Organization
KeywordsIsolation (microbiology)AntibioticsAntibiotic resistanceMultiple drug resistanceIntensive care medicineMeta-analysisMedicineBiologyMicrobiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic use drives antibiotic resistance. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature and estimate associations between prior exposure to antibiotics across World Health Organization's (WHO) AWaRe categories (Access, Watch, Reserve) and isolation of critical and high-priority multidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) on the WHO priority pathogen list. DATA SOURCES: Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from inception to 20/08/2020). STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Case-control, cohort, or experimental studies that assessed the risk of infection/colonization with MDROs. PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients or outpatients of any age and sex. INTERVENTIONS: Prior exposure to antibiotics that could be categorized into the AWaRe framework. DATA ANALYSIS: Tailored design-specific checklists applied to each included study. For each antibiotic/class, crude odds ratios (ORs) were pooled through random-effects meta-analyses, both overall and by MDRO. Heterogeneity was examined. RESULTS: We identified 349 eligible studies. All were observational, prone to bias due to design and lack of adjustment for confounding, and not primarily designed to compare associations across AWaRe categories. We found statistically significant associations between prior exposure to almost all antibiotics/classes across AWaRe categories and colonization/infection with any MDRO. We observed higher ORs for Watch and Reserve antibiotics than with Access antibiotics. First generation cephalosporins (Access) had the least association with any MDRO colonization/infection (58 studies; OR = 1.2 [95% CI: 1.0-1.4]), whereas strongest associations were estimated for linezolid (Reserve) (22 studies; OR = 2.6 [95% CI: 2.1-3.1]), followed by carbapenems (Watch) (237 studies; OR = 2.3 [95% CI: 2.1-2.5]). There was high heterogeneity for all antibiotic/MDRO associations. CONCLUSIONS: Optimising use of Access antibiotics is likely to reduce the selection of MDROs and global antibiotic resistance. Despite data limitations, our study offers a strong rationale for further adoption of AWaRe as an important tool to improve antibiotic use globally.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.028
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations179
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical Microbiology and InfectionSame topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207