MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4397046101 · doi:10.1681/asn.20223311s1453b

Variation in the Approach to Antibiotic Administration for the Treatment of Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis: Results From a Survey of US Medical Directors Participating in the OPPUS Study

2022· article· en· W4397046101 on OpenAlexaff
Muthana Al Sahlawi, Brian Bieber, Sana Khan, Osama El Shamy, Martin J. Schreiber, Isaac Teitelbaum, Leslie Garcia, Ronald L. Pisoni, Jeffrey Perl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeritoneal dialysisMedicinePeritonitisAntibioticsAdministration (probate law)Variation (astronomy)Intensive care medicineInternal medicineMicrobiologyPolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis carries significant morbidity and is the leading cause of technique failure and transition to hemodialysis. This study aimed to explore the variation in antibiotic dosing and administration for the treatment of PD-associated peritonitis among a diverse group of PD facilities participating in the Optimizing Prevention of PD-associated Peritonitis in US (OPPUS) study. Methods: As part of the OPPUS study, an online peritonitis-focused survey was administered in quarter 1 of 2022 to medical directors at 40 PD study sites, representing independent, small, medium, and large sized dialysis organizations. Surveys to date were completed by 38 of these study sites. Results: Most centers (78%) provide patients with antibiotics for self-administration at home whenever peritonitis is suspected but to be taken during clinic off-hours. Clinics differ considerably regarding the types and numbers of intraperitoneal vs oral antibiotics prescribed for such self-administration. Antibiotics are routinely administered in one exchange/day in 95% of facilities; only 47% of facilities adjust dose for residual kidney function. Moreover, most centers (82%) indicated having no access to effluent cell count before initiation of antibiotics, with typically >12-hour turnaround time before effluent cell count results are available at 74% of PD units. Large inter-facility variability was seen as to when repeat PD effluent cell count(s) and culture(s) should be taken. In addition, only 62% of facilities routinely check vancomycin trough levels when intra-peritoneal vancomycin is prescribed. Conclusions: Prompt administration of antibiotics has been consistently shown to be associated with better outcomes of peritonitis treatment. Significant variations exist in antibiotic dosing and administration for PD-associated peritonitis across PD facilities in the US. It is notable that less than 20% of PD units routinely have access to PD effluent cell count results before treatment is initiated. Identifying optimal antibiotic dosing and administration practices that maximize the likelihood of cure is an important step to improve peritonitis outcomes and decrease related adverse events. Funding: Other NIH Support - AHRQ

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→