MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403039351 · doi:10.3390/biomed4040030

Application of the Hub-and-Spoke Model in Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes: A Scoping Review

2024· review· en· W4403039351 on OpenAlexaff
Ayesha Iqbal, Yuhashinee Kumaradev, Gizem Gülpınar, Claire Brandish, Maxencia Nabiryo, Frances Garraghan, Helena Bonet Rosado, Victoria Rutter

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipStewardship (theology)Process managementBusinessEngineering managementEngineeringPolitical scienceMicrobiologyAntibiotic resistanceBiologyAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The hub-and-spoke model (HSM) offers a framework for efficient healthcare service delivery. This scoping review seeks to explore the implementation and effectiveness of the HSM in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guideline was followed. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) from inception until January 2024. Studies where the HSM was used for delivering any AMS activity, intervention, or action, were included. No study-specific filters were applied and all populations, study designs, and health settings were included. Data screening and selection were achieved using Rayyan. Three authors independently screened studies, with conflicts resolved by a fourth author. Data were narratively synthesised. Standard appraisal tools were impractical; however, critical evaluation of data collection and outcome reporting was ensured. Results: Out of 1438 articles, three were included in the scoping review. The primary interventions utilising the HSM in AMS involved reducing antibiotic misuse, training healthcare professionals, case-based learning, establishing AMS programmes, developing antibiograms, and formulating policies or guidelines pertinent to AMS. The studies demonstrated significant clinical improvements in AMS. Clinical outcomes from the studies include a significant reduction in antimicrobial usage and improved antibiotic management, with a notable decrease in days on antimicrobial therapy and increased antibiotic de-escalation. Key facilitators for AMS programme success were tailored education, collaborative learning, strong leadership, strategic practices, and data-driven decisions. Key barriers were leadership challenges, change resistance, knowledge gaps, inadequate data systems, resource limitations, and technological constraints. Conclusions: The review identified a literature gap in HSM use in AMS programmes. Further studies are needed to assess HSM’s effectiveness, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness in AMS contexts.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMedSame topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207