MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294335622 · doi:10.1101/2022.09.01.22279488

Antibiotic Resistance associated with the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Rapid Systematic Review

2022· preprint· en· W4294335622 on OpenAlexaff
BJ Langford, Jean-Paul R. Soucy, Valerie Leung, Miranda So, JS Portnoff, Silvia Bertagnolio, Sumit Raybardhan, Derek R. MacFadden, Nick Daneman

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicMedicineIncidence (geometry)Antibiotic resistanceAcinetobacterPopulationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineAntibioticsEnvironmental healthBiologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background COVID-19 and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are two intersecting global public health crises. Objective We aim to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AMR across healthcare settings. Data Source A search was conducted in December 2021 in World Health Organization’s COVID-19 Research Database with forward citation searching up to June 2022. Study Eligibility Studies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on AMR in any population were included and influencing factors were extracted. Methods Pooling was done separately for Gram-negative and Gram-positive organisms. Random effects meta-analysis was performed. Results Of 6036 studies screened, 28 were included and 23 provided sufficient data for meta-analysis. The majority of studies focused on hospital settings (n=25, 89%). The COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with a change in the incidence density (IRR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.47) or proportion (RR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.55 to 1.49) of MRSA or VRE cases. A non-statistically significant increase was noted for resistant Gram-negatives (i.e., ESBL, CRE, MDR or carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas or Acinetobacter species, IRR 1.64, 95% CI: 0.92 to 2.92; RR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.29). The absence of enhanced IPAC and/or ASP initiatives was associated with an increase in Gram-negative AMR (RR 1.11, 95%CI: 1.03 to 1.20), while studies that did report implementation of these initiatives noted no change in Gram-negative AMR (RR 0.80, 95%CI: 0.38 to 1.70). However, a test for subgroup differences showed no statistically significant difference between these groups (P=0.40) Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic could play an important role in the emergence and transmission of AMR, particularly for Gram-negative organisms in hospital settings. There is considerable heterogeneity in both the AMR metrics utilized and the rate of resistance reported across studies. These findings reinforce the need for strengthened infection prevention, antimicrobial stewardship, and AMR surveillance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022325831 This research was carried out as part of routine work, no funding was received Data collection template, data, and analytic code are available upon request.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.012
Bibliometrics0.0120.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207