Antimicrobial stewardship programs in a network of Canadian acute care hospitals: a cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Antibiotics are essential to combating infections; however, misuse and overuse has contributed to antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are a strategy to combat AMR and are mandatory in Canadian hospitals for accreditation. The Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program (CNISP) sought to capture a snapshot of ASP practices within the network of Canadian acute care hospitals. Objectives of the survey were to describe the status, practices, and process indicators of ASPs across acute care hospitals participating in CNISP. Design: The survey explored the following items related to ASP programs: 1) program structure and leadership, 2) human, technical and financial resources allocated, 3) inventory of interventions carried and implemented, 4) tracking antimicrobial use; and 5) educational and promotional components. Methods: CNISP developed a 34-item survey in both English and French. The survey was administered to 109 participating CNISP hospitals from June to August 2024, responses were analyzed descriptively. Results: Ninety-seven percent (106/109) of CNISP hospitals responded to the survey. Eighty-four percent (89/106) reported having a formal ASP in place at the time of the study. Ninety percent (80/89) of acute care hospitals with an ASP performed prospective audit and feedback for antibiotic agents and 85% (76/89) had formal surveillance of quantitative antimicrobial use. Additionally, just over 80% (74/89) provided education to their prescribers and other healthcare staff. Conclusions: CNISP acute care hospitals employ multiple key aspects of ASP including implementing interventions and monitoring/tracking antimicrobial use. There were acute care hospitals without an ASP, highlighting areas for investigation and improvement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".