MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223505753 · doi:10.1017/ice.2022.78

Rotating opportunistic prevalence audit: A new pragmatic audit method is effective at identifying misuse of ciprofloxacin in a large academic hospital

2022· article· en· W4223505753 on OpenAlexaff
Justin Z. Chen, David Waldner, Lynora Saxinger

Bibliographic record

VenueInfection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditMedical prescriptionCiprofloxacinMedicineTertiary careEmergency medicineFamily medicineIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyBusinessNursingAntibioticsAccountingMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rotating opportunistic prevalence audit (ROPA) methodology is described with ciprofloxacin prescriptions in adults hospitalized at a tertiary-care center. Prescription appropriateness was assessed. ROPA captured 82% of all ciprofloxacin prescriptions; 69% were inappropriate. ROPA is feasible and may overcome resource barriers of prospective audit and feedback.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfection Control and Hospital EpidemiologySame topicPneumonia and Respiratory InfectionsFrench-language works237,207