Emerging pathogens <i>Aerococcus urinae</i> and <i>Aerococcus sanguinicola</i> from a Canadian tertiary care hospital
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
Background: Aerococcus urinae and Aerococcus sanguinicola are emerging pathogens linked with urinary tract infections. We present a case series of A. urinae and A. sanguinicola isolates characterizing the spectrum of clinical presentation, microbiological characteristics and antimicrobial sensitivities.Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed on patients who grew positive cultures for A. urinae and A. sanguinicola identified on MALDI-TOF in Saskatchewan from January to June 2023. Demographic and clinical variables, antimicrobial susceptibility and prescription were documented.Results: This cohort (n = 115) had a median age 82 years. A. urinae and A. sanguinicola infections spanned from urinary tract infection (n = 96) to urosepsis (n = 6). These infections were predominantly monomicrobial (73.9%) and were susceptible to ceftriaxone, penicillin G and vancomycin. Antimicrobials were seldom prescribed within the urinary tract infection cohort (31.2%).Conclusion: Untreated A. urinae and A. sanguinicola infections can precipitate into urosepsis. The reported antimicrobial susceptibility for these Aerococcus isolates should be utilized to provide appropriate antimicrobial coverage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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