Identification of the elements of models of antimicrobial resistance of bacteria for assessing their usefulness and usability in One Health decision making: a protocol for scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a complex problem that requires the One Health approach, that is, a collaboration among various disciplines working in different sectors (animal, human and environment) to resolve it. Mathematical and statistical models have been used to understand AMR development, emergence, dissemination, prediction and forecasting. A review of the published models of AMR will help consolidate our knowledge of the dynamics of AMR and will also facilitate decision-makers and researchers in evaluating the credibility, generalisability and interpretation of the results and aspects of AMR models. The study objective is to identify and synthesise knowledge on mathematical and statistical models of AMR among bacteria in animals, humans and environmental compartments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility criteria: Original research studies reporting mathematical and statistical models of AMR among bacteria in animal, human and environmental compartments that were published until 2022 in English, French and Spanish will be included in this study. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Database of PubMed, Agricola (Ovid), Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience Direct (CABI), Web of Science (Clarivate), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and MathScinet. Data charting: Metadata of the study, the context of the study, model structure, model process and reporting quality will be extracted. A narrative summary of this information, gaps and recommendations will be prepared and reported in One Health decision-making context. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval was not obtained for this study as neither human participation nor unpublished human data were used in this study. The study findings will be widely disseminated among the One Health Modelling Network for Emerging Infections network and stakeholders by means of conferences, and publication in open-access peer-reviewed journals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.174 | 0.231 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.032 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.010 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".