Antibiotic Treatment Duration for Bloodstream Infections in Critically Ill Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Antibiotic treatment duration for bloodstream infections (BSIs) is an area of controversy and uncertainty. Aims: Our objective was to assess antibiotic treatment duration practices for critically ill patients with BSIs in Kuwait. Subjects and Methods: A survey consisting of clinical scenarios followed by questions about recommended antibiotic treatment duration for each scenario was sent to Kuwaiti infectious diseases, critical care specialists, and anesthetists with critical care experience. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive analysis (medians and interquartile ranges) and Kruskal–Wallis test were used for statistical analysis. Results: The survey response rate was 68% (112/164). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) ranges for antibiotic duration recommendations were similar for each bacteremic syndrome: central line-associated BSIs, 10 days (7–14); pneumonia, 10 days (7–14); urinary tract infection, 10 days (7–14); intra-abdominal infection, 10 days (7–14); and skin and soft-tissue infection, 10 days (7–14). The median (IQR) antibiotic durations for the following bacteria were as follows: Staphylococcus aureus , 14 days (10–14); extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Escherichia coli , 10 days (7–14); multidrug-resistant (MDR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa , 14 days (10–14); MDR Acinetobacter baumannii , 14 days (10–14); vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis , 14 days (10–14); carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae , 14 days (10–14); and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus , 7 days (7–10). For all infectious syndromes and individual organisms, duration responses often followed discrete choices of 5, 7, 10, and 14 days. Prolonging antibiotic therapy for immunocompromised patients was favored among 70% of respondents. Conclusions: This survey demonstrates practice variation in treating BSIs and supports the need for adequately powered randomized controlled trials assessing optimal antibiotic duration for various bacteremic syndromes, pathogens, and resistance patterns.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".