Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Antibiotic treatment may destroy beneficial intestinal flora, often resulting in diarrhea. Between 3% and 22% of patients in hospital have antibioticrelated diarrhea, and this may cause pseudomembranous colitis. 1 Several placebo-controlled studies suggest that taking probiotics may reduce the incidence of diarrhea in patients receiving antibiotic treatment. 2–5 Probiotics are live microbial supplements such as Lactobacillus acidophilus that beneficially affect humans by altering their intestinal microbial balance. To determine whether physicians recommend probiotics to their patients to prevent antibiotic-related diarrhea, I surveyed a sample of family physicians in Nova Scotia. I mailed a cover letter, brief questionnaire on probiotic use and a stamped return envelope to the first 100 family physicians, in alphabetical order, listed in the telephone directories for northeastern and central Nova Scotia. Of the 100 surveys sent out, 66 were completed and returned. Three physicians returned the questionnaire uncompleted, stating that they were no longer in active practice. This resulted in a survey response rate of 68%. The responding physicians were in practice for as few as 2 years to as many as 57 years (mean 19.7 years). All of the respondents stated that they prescribe antibiotics on a regular basis. Only 21 (32%) reported that they recommend probiotics to their patients when prescribing antibiotics; of these, 10 stated that they do so always or often, and 11 seldom do so. Only 12 physicians (18%) indicated that they were aware of any research on probiotics. Fortytwo respondents provided reasons for not recommending the use of probiotics: 13 (31%) stated that there was not enough research to support such use, 13 (31%) were not familiar with probiotics, 10 (24%) felt that they were not necessary, 2 (5%) stated that it was not an accepted practice to recommend their use, and 4 (10%) gave other, miscellaneous reasons. Most of the family physicians who participated in this survey are not recommending probiotic use to their patients when prescribing antibiotics. However, physicians appear to be open to the possibilities of probiotic use. Some respondents commented that they are aware of anecdotal evidence that probiotics are effective in treating antibiotic-induced illnesses. The majority of respondents felt that more research is required into the effect of combining antibiotic treatment with probiotics (88%) and that more information about probiotics is needed (82%). Physicians need to be made aware of the current information available on probiotics, and more high-quality, double-blind trials are needed to answer some of the questions raised by physicians.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».