Community‐Associated Methicillin‐Resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> Infections in Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to describe the clinical characteristics and management of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) infections among a cohort of men who have sex with men. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients with culture-proven MRSA at Maple Leaf Medical Clinic (Toronto, Ontario) between November 2004 and December 2005. Cases were identified by individual physicians and by queries in the clinical management system. A standard data collection form was used to record patient demographics, potential risk factors for MRSA and course of illness. When available, antimicrobial sensitivities were recorded. DNA fingerprinting using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, and genetic analysis for SCCmec typing and detection of the Panton-Valentine leukocidin cytotoxin were performed on six available isolates. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with MRSA infection were identified, 12 (71%) of whom were HIV-positive. The most common clinical presentation was abscess (35%), followed by furuncle (17%), folliculitis (17%), cellulitis (17%) and sinusitis (12%). The majority of MRSA isolates were resistant to ciprofloxacin (92%) and levofloxacin (77%). All isolates were susceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, rifampin, linezolid, gentamicin and clindamycin, while the majority were susceptible to tetracycline (80%). All six isolates tested were SCCmec type IVa-positive and Panton-Valentine leukocidin-positive, and had fingerprint patterns consistent with the CMRSA-10 (USA300) clone. CONCLUSION: The present study describes the clinical presentation and management of CA-MRSA infections occurring in Toronto among men who have sex with men. The infections appear to have been caused by CMRSA-10, which has caused the majority of CA-MRSA outbreaks elsewhere.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".