Additional file 2 of Prophylactic antibiotics for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia: a pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 2: Table S1. The quality assessments of observational studies using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score. Figure S1. The quality assessments of interventional studies using risk of bias tool 2 （ROB2）recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Figure S2. Forest plots of the effect of prophylactic antibiotics compared with placebo, on the duration of invasive ventilation. Studies are grouped by the routes of administration. Figure S3. Forest plots of the effect of prophylactic antibiotics, compared with placebo, on the duration of ICU stay. Studies are grouped by the route of administration. Figure S4. Forest plots of the effect of prophylactic antibiotics compared with placebo, on the duration of hospitalization. Studies are grouped by the route of administration. Figure S5. Forest plots of the effect of prophylactic antibiotics, compared with placebo, on adverse events. Studies are grouped by the route of administration. Figure S6. Funnel plot of the included studies for incidence of VAP. Figure S7. Sensitivity analyses on the incidence of VAP. Figure S8. GRADE assessment of a) randomized controlled studies and b) observational studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.830 | 0.041 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".