Clinical Breakpoints and Epidemiological Cutoff Values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interpreting the value of in vitro susceptibility test results relies not only on the quality and standardization of test methods but also on the quality and standardization of the methods used to derive interpretive thresholds. Clinical breakpoints (CBPs) are developed from a collection of in vitro and in vivo data so that the interpretation of a susceptibility test result correlates with the likelihood of a good patient outcome. Epidemiological cutoff values, which categorize MIC values as wild‐type or non‐wildtype, are developed strictly from in vitro MIC data and correlate with the likelihood of a cultured isolate harboring an acquired mechanism of resistance to the tested antimicrobial agent. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute CBPs have been developed for the echinocandins, fluconazole, and voriconazole against the more common species of Candida as well as for voriconazole against Aspergillus fumigatus . EUCAST provides CBPs for yeasts and molds for susceptibility testing performed according to its broth microdilution protocol.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".