Challenges for global antibiotic regimen planning and establishing antimicrobial resistance targets: implications for the WHO Essential Medicines List and AWaRe antibiotic book dosing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The World Health Organisation’s 2022 AWaRe Book provides guidance for the use of 39 antibiotics to treat 35 infections in primary healthcare and hospital facilities. We review the evidence underpinning suggested dosing regimens. Few ( n = 18) population pharmacokinetic studies exist for key oral AWaRe antibiotics, largely conducted in homogenous and unrepresentative populations hindering robust estimates of drug exposures. Databases of minimum inhibitory concentration distributions are limited, especially for community pathogen-antibiotic combinations. Minimum inhibitory concentration data sources are not routinely reported and lack regional diversity and community representation. Of studies defining a pharmacodynamic target for ß-lactams ( n = 80), 42 (52.5%) differed from traditionally accepted 30%–50% time above minimum inhibitory concentration targets. Heterogeneity in model systems and pharmacodynamic endpoints is common, and models generally use intravenous ß-lactams. One-size-fits-all pharmacodynamic targets are used for regimen planning despite complexity in drug-pathogen-disease combinations. We present solutions to enable the development of global evidence-based antibiotic dosing guidance that provides adequate treatment in the context of the increasing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance and, moreover, minimizes the emergence of resistance.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it