MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416123928

Towards a matrix to assess the impacts of integrated surveillance of antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial use

2022· article· en· W4416123928 on OpenAlexaff
Marion Bordier, Cécile Aenishaenslin, Laura Tomassone, Luís Pédro Carmo, Nicolas Antoine Moussiaux

Bibliographic record

VenueAgritrop (Cirad) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpert elicitationStakeholderPrioritizationMaturity (psychological)Antibiotic resistanceExpert opinionRisk assessment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction - Tackling the challenge of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) requires changes in antimicrobial use (AMU) across human, animal and agricultural sectors. To trigger adequate changes, both at individual as at policy level, all actors in the system must be informed by integrated surveillance. Consequently, it is crucial to assess the impacts of the information produced by such integrated systems to provide evidence of their added value. In this context, we aimed at developing a matrix to assess the impacts of integrated surveillance of AMR and AMU. Materials and Methods A preliminary evaluation tool was developed using impact pathway analysis. Using evidence from previous research, evaluation attributes and their indicators were identified for each of the immediate, intermediate and ultimate outcomes. The preliminary tool will be then submitted to a panel of international experts for validation and prioritization according to the surveillance context. Results - The evaluation matrix includes outcomes´ attributes to assess changes in surveillance performance, stakeholder awareness, knowledge and practices, cross-sectoral collaboration, systems knowledge, AMR risk management, surveillance costs, as well as health and economic impacts. Indicators are either observed or stated, and measured using both qualitative (eg. document analysis, key informant interviews) and quantitative methods (eg. epidemiological, economic analysis). The expert opinion elicitation will allow us to identify the adequate evaluation timeline, as well as the appropriateness of the attributes and indicators depending on the maturity of the evaluated system. Conclusion - The developed evaluation matrix provides guidance to assess the impacts of integrated surveillance systems of AMR and AMU conducted in a One Health context. It can be used as a stand-alone tool to specifically assess the outcomes of the surveillance system, or in conjunction with existing surveillance tools to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the system.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0120.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgritrop (Cirad)Same topicAntibiotic Use and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207