MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404404894 · doi:10.1016/j.lana.2024.100942

Antimicrobial utilisation patterns between 2013 and 2022 in Canadian neonates born at less than 33 weeks gestation: a retrospective cohort study

2024· article· en· W4404404894 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joseph Ting, Shikha Gupta, J Choudhury, Eugene W. Yoon, Guillaume Éthier, Rebecca Sherlock, Jennifer Toye, Marc Beltempo, Prakesh S. Shah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Americas · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and Maternal Infections
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversitySurrey Memorial HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMount Sinai HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsGestationRetrospective cohort studyAntimicrobialCohortMedicineCohort studyPediatricsPregnancyBiologyInternal medicineMicrobiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Excessive antimicrobial exposure is associated with an increase in neonatal mortality, morbidities and adverse neurodevelopment. Canadian Neonatal Network has been promoting judicious antimicrobial use through the Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality processes. Our objective was to evaluate the antimicrobial consumption among neonates in tertiary neonatal intensive care units (NICU) in Canada in the recent decade. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study including data from very preterm infants (born at <33 weeks gestational age) admitted to all NICUs in Canada between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2022. Nationwide antimicrobial utilization rate (AUR) benchmarking started in 2016, and quality improvement initiatives were continued in the subsequent years to promote judicious use of antimicrobials across the network. AUR is defined as the number of days with ≥1 antimicrobial divided by the total patient days (PD). Culture-proven sepsis refers to a neonate with positive culture of pathogens in blood and/or cerebrospinal fluid. The outcomes were evaluated during pre- (2013-2017) and post-intervention periods (2018-2022). Interrupted time-series analysis was used, and comparison of AUR calculated per each 3-month time block and the slope changes were conducted across the pre- and post-intervention periods regarding total patients and subgroups. Findings: A total of 41,253 infants were included, with 22,644 (55%) being male. The AUR was significantly lower among infants from the post- vs. those from the pre-intervention periods (152 vs. 184, p < 0.0001). Among 35,670 infants without culture-proven sepsis or necrotizing enterocolitis ≥ Stage 2, AUR was significantly lower in the post-intervention group vs. the pre-intervention group (110 vs. 136, p < 0.0001). Interrupted time-series showed significant reduction in AUR during both pre- and post-intervention periods among all infants with and without culture proven sepsis or necrotizing enterocolitis ≥ Stage 2 (all p < 0.0001), as well as those born at <29 weeks gestational age. Interpretation: A comprehensive, network-wide quality improvement initiatives led to a significant and sustained reduction in antimicrobial use among preterm infants born at <33 weeks gestational age with and without culture-proven sepsis or necrotizing enterocolitis ≥ Stage 2. Funding: This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Project Grant 2019 (201903PJT-420294-CA2-CAAA-245530), matched funding from the British Columbia Women's Health Foundation and start-up funding from the Women and Children's Health Research Institute, University of Alberta. The coordinating center in Toronto is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant for the Canadian Preterm Birth Network (PBN 150642).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - AmericasSame topicNeonatal and Maternal InfectionsFrench-language works237,207