Antimicrobial stewardship in pediatric solid organ transplantation: Is it possible?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at increased risk of severe outcomes associated with antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) play a vital role in mitigating the negative impacts of AMR. Pediatric evidence regarding ASP for SOT recipients is scarce, although many pediatric SOT centers have implemented different forms of ASP. METHODS: This article summarized the available evidence relating to AMR among pediatric SOT recipients and discussed key strategies for the successful implementation of ASP among this population. The focus is primarily on antibacterial and secondarily on antifungal management. RESULTS: The development of multidisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship teams for pediatric SOT recipients is essential for successful stewardship implementation. Key stakeholders may include but are not limited to SOT recipients and their caregivers, primary SOT teams (transplant physicians, transplant pharmacists, transplant unit nurses, and transplant outpatient care team), transplant surgery teams, transplant infectious diseases teams, hospital AST, microbiology teams, infection prevention teams, quality improvement teams, and information technology teams. CONCLUSION: As the evidence for optimal ASP in pediatric SOT is still evolving, it is important to measure the impact of implemented interventions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".