MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389085591 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20220221

Population-based outpatient antimicrobial use in Newfoundland and Labrador: a retrospective descriptive study

2023· article· en· W4389085591 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ben Edwards, Robert J. Wilson, Peter Daley

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical prescriptionPopulationAntimicrobialPharmacyDefined daily doseAmoxicillinPediatricsPharmacoepidemiologyInternal medicineAntibioticsFamily medicinePharmacologyEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data that have been reported on antimicrobial use in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) do not appear to be representative of use at the population level. We sought to use pharmacy network data on prescriptions to describe outpatient antimicrobial use in NL. METHODS: We analyzed all outpatient antimicrobial prescriptions dispensed between June 1, 2017, and June 8, 2021, from the provincial pharmacy network database and translated deidentified data into SPSS. We excluded prescriptions for parenteral and topical antimicrobials, antivirals and antifungals. We described antimicrobial use using the prescription rate and defined daily dose (DDD) rate. RESULTS: Overall, we analyzed 1 586 534 prescriptions dispensed to 394 708 people by 3431 prescribers. The rate of antimicrobial use was 741 prescriptions per 1000 population per year (7161 DDD/1000 population/yr). The median duration of prescriptions was 7 (interquartile range 7-10) days. The prescription rate decreased from 867 to 546 per 1000 population per year (-37%) over the study period, and the mean DDD rate decreased from 8387 to 5356 DDD per 1000 population per year (-36.1%). Antimicrobials with the highest DDD rate were amoxicillin (1568 DDD/1000/yr), doxycycline (864 DDD/1000/yr) and ciprofloxacin (633 DDD/1000/yr). Prescribers wrote a mean of 102 (standard deviation 248) prescriptions per year; 3 prescribers wrote more than 2500 prescriptions per year. Overall, 9203 (2.3%) of the 394 708 people in the study population received 4 or more prescriptions per year. INTERPRETATION: The rate of antimicrobial use in NL is lower than previously described in national surveillance data. Potential targets for stewardship intervention include prolonged duration of prescriptions, high-rate prescribers and high-rate patients, but further research is needed to assess the appropriateness of prescriptions according to diagnosis.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207