MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391154380 · doi:10.2460/ajvr.23.12.0294

Current state and future directions for veterinary antimicrobial resistance research

2024· article· en· W4391154380 on OpenAlexaff
Kelli J. Maddock, Robert A. Bowden, Stephen D. Cole, Dubraska Diaz‐Campos, Joshua B. Daniels, Tessa E. LeCuyer, Xian-Zhi Li, John Dustin Loy, Susan Sánchez, Brianna L. S. Stenger, Claire R. Burbick

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Veterinary Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipOne HealthAntibiotic resistanceMedicineAnimal healthVeterinary medicineStewardship (theology)Resistance (ecology)Alternative medicinePolitical sciencePathologyBiologyAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a critical One Health concern with implications for human, animal, plant, and environmental health. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), antimicrobial resistance testing (ART), and surveillance practices must be harmonized across One Health sectors to ensure consistent detection and reporting practices. Veterinary diagnostic laboratory stewardship, clinical outcomes studies, and training for current and future generations of veterinarians and laboratorians are necessary to minimize the spread of AMR and move veterinary medicine forward into an age of better antimicrobial use practices. The purpose of this article is to describe current knowledge gaps present in the literature surrounding ART, AST, and clinical or surveillance applications of these methods and to suggest areas where AMR research can fill these knowledge gaps. The related Currents in One Health by Maddock et al, JAVMA, March 2024, addresses current limitations to the use of genotypic ART methods in clinical veterinary practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Veterinary ResearchSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207