Availability and Key Characteristics of National Early Warning Systems for Emerging Profiles of Antimicrobial Resistance in High-Income Countries: Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) recently advocated an urgent need for implementing national surveillance systems for the timely detection and reporting of emerging antimicrobial resistance (AMR). However, public information on the existing national early warning systems (EWSs) is often incomplete, and a comprehensive overview on this topic is currently lacking. Objective: This review aimed to map the availability of EWSs for emerging AMR in high-income countries and describe their main characteristics. Methods: A systematic review was performed on bibliographic databases, and a targeted search was conducted on national websites. Any article, report, or web page describing national EWSs in high-income countries was eligible for inclusion. EWSs were identified considering the emerging AMR-reporting WHO framework. Results: We identified 7 national EWSs from 72 high-income countries: 2 in the East Asia and Pacific Region (Australia and Japan), 3 in Europe and Central Asia (France, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), and 2 in North America (the United States and Canada). The systems were established quite recently; in most cases, they covered both community and hospital settings, but their main characteristics varied widely across countries in terms of the organization and microorganisms under surveillance, with also different definitions of emerging AMR and alert functioning. A formal system assessment was available only in Australia. Conclusions: A broader implementation and investment of national surveillance systems for the early detection of emerging AMR are still needed to establish EWSs in countries and regions lacking such capabilities. More standardized data collection and reporting are also advisable to improve cooperation on a global scale. Further research is required to provide an in-depth analysis of EWSs, as this study is limited to publicly available data in high-income countries.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".