The effectiveness of new antibiotics in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
StrESzczEniEPozaszpitalne zapalenie płuc (PZP), definiowane jako ostra infekcja miąższu płucnego, nabyta poza szpitalami, jest jedną z najczęstszych przyczyn hospitalizacji i zgonów, szczególnie wśród osób po 65. roku życia oraz z upośledzoną odpornością.Jest to duży problem ze względu na starzejące się społeczeństwa wielu krajów oraz występujące choroby współistniejące.Pomimo rozwoju metod diagnostycznych, u około połowy pacjentów z PZP, nie można ustalić etiologii, co podkreśla znaczenie leczenia empirycznego i zagrożenia związane z rosnącą antybiotykoopornością na dostępne preparaty.W ostatnich latach do leczenia PZP zostały dopuszczone nowe antybiotyki, co znacząco może poprawić możliwości empirycznego terapii tej choroby.Słowa kluczowE pozaszpitalne zapalenie płuc, antybiotyki, lefamulina, delafloksacyna, omadacyklina, ceftobiprol.abStract Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), defined as acute pulmonary parenchymal infection acquired outside the hospital, remains one of the most common causes of hospitalization and death, especially among people over 65 and those with impaired immunity.This is a serious problem due to aging societies in many countries and comorbidities.Despite the development of diagnostic methods, in half of the patients with CAP, the etiology cannot be determined, which emphasizes the importance of empirical treatment and the risk of increasing antibiotic resistance to available preparations.In recent years, new antibiotics have been approved for the treatment of CAP, which may significantly improve the possibilities of empirical treatment of CAP.kEy wordS community-acquired pneumonia, antibiotics, lefamulin, delafloxacin, omadacycline, ceftobiprole.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".