MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100745247

High Rates of Staphylococcus aureus

2013· article· en· W7100745247 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaphylococcus aureusIncidence (geometry)Antibiotic resistanceGeneral partnershipPublic healthStaphylococcal infectionsEpidemiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Members of the Northern Antibiotic Resistance Partnership are listed at the end of this article. Surveillance of Staphylococcus aureus infections in 3 northern remote communities of Saskatchewan was undertaken. Rates of methicillin-resistant infections were extremely high (146–482/10,000 population), and most (98.2%) were caused by USA400 strains. Although USA400 prevalence has diminished in the United States, this strain is continuing to predominate throughout many northern communities in Canada. Over the past decade, community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) infections have rapidly emerged in Canada (1). These CA-MRSA strains are causing infections in often young otherwise healthy persons with no traditional health care– associated risk factors (2), linked with increased illness severity and deaths (3), and now entering and being disseminated within health care facilities (4). In comparison to the incidence of CA-MRSA infections in large urban centers across Canada, which has been addressed through the ongoing efforts of the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program (1), little attention Page 1 of 8has been directed at the emerging problem of CA-MRSA or CA-methicillin-susceptible S.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207