SAPUVET and SAPUVETNET projects: a contribution to the understanding of the prudent use of antimicrobials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of the projects is working are the development of strategies to improve learning and teaching VPH. The main results of the project can be summarized in: the proposal of a common VPH curriculum, to design teaching material as case studies or a manual on VPH, the coordination of some e-conferences and a journal “One Health”. All the materials can be freely distributed or used for distance learning by the way of the web site. Some activities and materials are related to the increase of antimicrobials resistant microorganisms and their role in public health. These activities are: 1- Development of the chapter “Bacterial resistance; control strategies, good practices and prudent use of antimicrobials” in the manual of Veterinary Public Health- One Health. Organization of two open electronic conferences to discuss the problem of the use of antimicrobials in veterinary medicine, the associated risks to their use in public health and the alternatives to apply based on the prudent use of antimicrobials. The e-conference Local practices in production and animal health, with special reference to the use of medicines and the resistance to antibiotics: consequences in veterinary public health" took place in march 2007 and the e-conference “PRUDENT USE OF ANTIMICROBIALS IN ANIMALS: SOLUTION OR UTOPIA?” took place in september 2010, both of them using the moodle platform and involving students, lecturers and professionals from Canada, Latin America, Africa and Europe. In this last e-conference, the general opinion agrees with the use of antimicrobials for therapeutic and prophylactic purposes. However, their use as additives was not consensual, both among group members as other participants. Some opinions defended that the use of some specific antimicrobials as additives makes sense in some circumstances, as long as with a serious and strict control. But all professionals agree that veterinarians should work based in sanitary planning and in preventive medicine to avoid the use of antimicrobials, and the absolute need for multicenter research, which will can take more informed decisions. It was also introduced the concern of the inappropriate use of other chemical products and its relation with antimicrobial resistance; related with this, all the group agree with the most correct use of the term “antimicrobials” to describe any substance that kill microorganisms, including natural compounds, produced or not by microorganisms and synthetic antimicrobials compounds, instead of the term “antibiotic”, more restricted, although previously used by the group. SAPUVETNET members have also published a manuscript in the first volume of the journal “One Health” called: “the problem of antibiotics resistance in public health”. A group of case studies concerning to health problems linked to the use of antimicrobials have been included in the learning materials: Multiresistant Salmonella enterica Thyphimurium in human and animal populations; Multi-resistance to antibiotics of porcine origin; Relapsed multirresistant infection in a Golden dog and Residuum of antimicrobial substances in bovine meet and viscera. The main conclusions were: there are differences in the use of antibiotics between countries, particularly considering different ways of animal health management and hygiene; regulation of the use of antibiotics at legal standpoint and surveillance programs are necessary, ethics of health workers are key to solve the problem. These materials are tested actually by the lecturers of the Universities involved in SAPUVETNET project.
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 | 0.020 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".