Development and external validation of a model to predict multidrug‐resistant bacterial infections in patients with cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increasing rate of infections caused by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO), selecting appropriate empiric antibiotics has become challenging. We aimed to develop and externally validate a model for predicting the risk of MDRO infections in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: We included patients with cirrhosis and bacterial infections from two prospective studies: a transcontinental study was used for model development and internal validation (n = 1302), and a study from Argentina and Uruguay was used for external validation (n = 472). All predictors were measured at the time of infection. Both culture-positive and culture-negative infections were included. The model was developed using logistic regression with backward stepwise predictor selection. We externally validated the optimism-adjusted model using calibration and discrimination statistics and evaluated its clinical utility. RESULTS: The prevalence of MDRO infections was 19% and 22% in the development and external validation datasets, respectively. The model's predictors were sex, prior antibiotic use, type and site of infection, MELD-Na, use of vasopressors, acute-on-chronic liver failure, and interaction terms. Upon external validation, the calibration slope was 77 (95% CI .48-1.05), and the area under the ROC curve was .68 (95% CI .61-.73). The application of the model significantly changed the post-test probability of having an MDRO infection, identifying patients with nosocomial infection at very low risk (8%) and patients with community-acquired infections at significant risk (36%). CONCLUSION: This model achieved adequate performance and could be used to improve the selection of empiric antibiotics, aligning with other antibiotic stewardship program strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".