MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412785297 · doi:10.46747/cfp.710708e185

La <i>Mycoplasma pneumoniae</i> résistante chez l’enfant

2025· article· fr· W4412785297 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karin Ng, Kendra Sih, Ran D. Goldman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Family Physician · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMycoplasma pneumoniaeComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicineMicrobiologyBiologyPneumoniaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Question Une enfant de 5 ans est vue à notre clinique et présente un tableau clinique conforme à une pneumonie acquise dans la communauté. On lui prescrit un traitement avec de l’amoxicilline et de l’azithromycine, mais elle reste fébrile et revient à la clinique 3 jours plus tard. La famille revenait tout juste d’un voyage au Japon. Quelles sont les récentes données probantes accessibles concernant le traitement de la pneumonie due à la Mycoplasma pneumoniae résistante aux macrolides? Réponse Les taux de la M pneumoniae résistante aux macrolides (MPRM) sont à la hausse dans le monde, et son incidence est surtout élevée en Chine, au Japon et à Taïwan. La plupart des données probantes concernant les enfants préconisent le recours aux tétracyclines pour la MPRM, et des données factuelles plus limitées pointent vers les fluoroquinolones pour cette indication. Les enfants qui souffrent d’une pneumonie due à la M pneumoniae et qui ont des antécédents de voyages récents dans des pays où les taux de résistance sont élevés ou dont l’état ne s’améliore pas dans les 48 à 72 heures suivant un traitement aux macrolides devraient recevoir 2 mg/kg de doxycycline par voie orale 2 fois par jour (maximum de 100 mg par dose).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Family Physician→Same topicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections→French-language works237,207→