MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286587856 · doi:10.1007/s40471-021-00278-1

Electronic Health Records and Antimicrobial Stewardship Research: a Narrative Review

2022· review· en· W4286587856 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Epidemiology Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipHealth recordsNarrativeEpidemiologyStewardship (theology)MedicineNarrative reviewElectronic health recordAntimicrobialFamily medicineIntensive care medicinePolitical scienceHealth careBiologyInternal medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose of Review: This review summarises epidemiological research using electronic health records (EHR) for antimicrobial stewardship. Recent Findings: EHRs enable surveillance of antibiotic utilisation and infection consultations. Prescribing for respiratory tract infections has declined in the UK following reduced consultation rates. Reductions in prescribing for skin and urinary tract infections have been less marked. Drug selection has improved and use of broad-spectrum antimicrobics reduced. Diagnoses of pneumonia, sepsis and bacterial endocarditis have increased in primary care. Analytical studies have quantified risks of serious bacterial infections following reduced antibiotic prescribing. EHRs are increasingly used in interventional studies including point-of-care trials and cluster randomised trials of quality improvement. Analytical and interventional studies indicate patient groups for whom antibiotic utilisation may be more safely reduced. Summary: EHRs offer opportunities for surveillance and interventions that engage practitioners in the effects of improved prescribing practices, with the potential for better outcomes with targeted study designs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.214 · 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