MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321997018 · doi:10.1007/s15010-023-02005-y

Choosing Wisely internationally – helpful recommendations for antimicrobial stewardship!

2023· review· en· W4321997018 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfection · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitätsklinikum Köln
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipStewardship (theology)MedicineAntimicrobialIntensive care medicineEngineering ethicsBusinessPolitical scienceAntibiotic resistanceMicrobiologyAntibioticsBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Antimicrobial resistance poses a major threat to human health globally and antibiotic overuse is a main driver of resistance. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) was developed to improve the rationale use of antibiotics. The Choosing Wisely campaign was initiated to ameliorate medical practice through avoidance of unnecessary diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Our objective was to give an overview on the Choosing Wisely recommendations related to AMS practices from a selection of different countries in order to define future needs. METHODS: We evaluated the seven countries already analyzed for Choosing Wisely recommendations related to topics of infectious medicine before. Finally, we included five of the former countries (Australia/New Zealand, Canada, Italy, Switzerland, and USA) and Germany with easily accessible recommendations and selected those related to six categories of AMS as following: diagnostics, indication, choice of antiinfective drugs, dosing, application and duration of therapy. RESULTS: In total, 213 recommendations could be extracted related to AMS for the six countries and were matched to the chosen categories. Interestingly, no recommendations were found for the category "dosing." Topics related to indication and diagnostics were most frequently found with 85 and 78 recommendations, respectively. Perioperative prophylaxis was a frequently addressed issue - both related to application, indication and duration. Avoiding antibiotic treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria and upper respiratory tract infections were central topics of all countries. CONCLUSION: AMS is an important strategy to fight increasing resistance and is frequently addressed by Choosing Wisely recommendations of different countries. Similar issues are considered important in the selected countries.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, 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 score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.827
GPT teacher head0.646
Teacher spread0.181 · 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