Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Using an Antibiogram Profile to Improve Infection Control and Rational Antimicrobial Therapy in an Urban Hospital in The Gambia, Strategies and Lessons for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Antimicrobial resistance is a global health threat and efforts to mitigate it is warranted, thus the need for local antibiograms to improve stewardship. This study highlights the process that was used to develop an antibiogram to monitor resistance at a secondary-level health facility to aid empirical clinical decision making in a sub-Saharan African county. This retrospective cross-sectional descriptive study used 3 years of cumulative data from January 2016 to December 2018. Phenotypic data was manually imputed into WHONET and the cumulative antibiogram constructed using standardized methodologies according to CLSI M39-A4 guidelines. Pathogens were identified by standard manual microbiological methods and antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method according to CLSI M100 guidelines. A total of 14,776 non-duplicate samples were processed of which 1163 (7.9%) were positive for clinically significant pathogens. Among the 1163 pathogens, E. coli (n = 315) S. aureus (n = 232), and K. pneumoniae (n = 96) were the leading cause of disease. Overall, the susceptibility for E. coli and K. pneumoniae from all samples were: trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (17% and 28%), tetracycline (26% and 33%), gentamicin (72% and 46%), chloramphenicol (76 and 60%), and ciprofloxacin (69% and 59%), and amoxicillin/clavulanic (77% and 54%) respectively. Extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) resistance was present in 23% (71/315) vs. 35% (34/96) respectively. S. aureus susceptibility for methicillin was 99%. This antibiogram has shown that improvement in combination therapy is warranted in The Gambia

Using an Antibiogram Profile to Improve Infection Control and Rational Antimicrobial Therapy in an Urban Hospital in The Gambia, Strategies and Lessons for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Antimicrobial resistance is a global health threat and efforts to mitigate it is warranted, thus the need for local antibiograms to improve stewardship. This study highlights the process that was used to develop an antibiogram to monitor resistance at a secondary-level health facility to aid empirical clinical decision making in a sub-Saharan African county. This retrospective cross-sectional descriptive study used 3 years of cumulative data from January 2016 to December 2018. Phenotypic data was manually imputed into WHONET and the cumulative antibiogram constructed using standardized methodologies according to CLSI M39-A4 guidelines. Pathogens were identified by standard manual microbiological methods and antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method according to CLSI M100 guidelines. A total of 14,776 non-duplicate samples were processed of which 1163 (7.9%) were positive for clinically significant pathogens. Among the 1163 pathogens, E. coli (n = 315) S. aureus (n = 232), and K. pneumoniae (n = 96) were the leading cause of disease. Overall, the susceptibility for E. coli and K. pneumoniae from all samples were: trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (17% and 28%), tetracycline (26% and 33%), gentamicin (72% and 46%), chloramphenicol (76 and 60%), and ciprofloxacin (69% and 59%), and amoxicillin/clavulanic (77% and 54%) respectively. Extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) resistance was present in 23% (71/315) vs. 35% (34/96) respectively. S. aureus susceptibility for methicillin was 99%. This antibiogram has shown that improvement in combination therapy is warranted in The Gambia

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical science. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press