MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323066830 · doi:10.1093/cid/ciad113

Positron Emission Tomography in<i>Staphylococcus aureus</i>Bacteremia: Peeking Under the Covers

2023· letter· en· W4323066830 on OpenAlexaffabout
Todd C. Lee, Emily G. McDonald, Steven Y. C. Tong

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBacteremiaGeneral hospitalLibrary sciencePositron emission tomographyFamily medicineGerontologyNuclear medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(See the Major Article by van der Vaart et al. on pages 9–15.) Despite improvements over the past 20 years [1], the morbidity and mortality associated with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia are substantial with up to a 20% mortality rate at 30 days. S. aureus has a predilection toward deep-seated infections, which are not always clinically apparent, thus contributing to inadequate treatment or recurrence. The complex nature of S. aureus bacteremia has benefitted from interventions to standardize processes of care, such as automatic consultation with an infectious diseases specialist [2] and the implementation of care bundles [3]. In theory, improved outcomes have been mediated through guidance related to appropriate antibiotic therapy (eg, class, dose, optimal pharmacokinetics, route, and duration) and recommendations to obtain and operationalize source control (eg, line removal or drainage of abscesses). It follows that better identification of clinically silent foci of infection leading to subsequent refinements in management could further reduce mortality rates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.020

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious DiseasesSame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207