MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401107522 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2024-0049

Identification of key drivers of antimicrobial resistance in <i>Enterococcus</i> using machine learning

2024· article· en· W4401107522 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jee In Kim, Alexander Manuele, Finlay Maguire, Rahat Zaheer, Tim A. McAllister, Robert G. Beiko

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDalhousie University
FundersBeef Cattle Research CouncilAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsEnterococcusAntimicrobialMicrobiologyIdentification (biology)Key (lock)Antibiotic resistanceBiologyAntibioticsBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With antimicrobial resistance (AMR) rapidly evolving in pathogens, quick and accurate identification of genetic determinants of phenotypic resistance is essential for improving surveillance, stewardship, and clinical mitigation. Machine learning (ML) models show promise for AMR prediction in diagnostics but require a deep understanding of internal processes to use effectively. Our study utilised AMR gene, pangenomic, and predicted plasmid features from 647 Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis genomes across the One Health continuum, along with corresponding resistance phenotypes, to develop interpretive ML classifiers. Vancomycin resistance could be predicted with 99% accuracy with AMR gene features, 98% with pangenome features, and 96% with plasmid clusters. Top pangenome features overlapped with the resistance genes of the vanA operon, which are often laterally transmitted via plasmids. Doxycycline resistance prediction achieved approximately 92% accuracy with pangenome features, with the top feature being elements of Tn 916 conjugative transposon, a tet(M) carrier. Erythromycin resistance prediction models achieved about 90% accuracy, but top features were negatively correlated with resistance due to the confounding effect of population structure. This work demonstrates the importance of reviewing ML models’ features to discern biological relevance even when achieving high-performance metrics. Our workflow offers the potential to propose hypotheses for experimental testing, enhancing the understanding of AMR mechanisms, which are crucial for combating the AMR crisis.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207