Antibiotics used in the ambulatory management of acute COPD exacerbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to describe the different antibiotics that are used in the home management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations and to estimate the failure rates following the initiation of the antibiotic. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted. Patients enrolled in a COPD home management program were included in the analysis. Failure rates were defined as an additional prescription of an antibiotic, an emergency room visit, or a hospitalization for a COPD exacerbation in the 30 days following the initiation of the antibiotic. RESULTS: A total of 1180 episodes of antibiotic treatment were analyzed. Overall, 348 episodes led to a failure (29.5%). The most frequently used antibiotics were cefuroxime (45.9%) and ciprofloxacin (21.1%). CONCLUSION: This project demonstrates that a wide range of antibiotics were prescribed to our population of COPD patients with a moderate to severe form of the disease. Many treatment failures (about 30%) occurred in the 30-day period following the initiation of the home therapy with an antibiotic. Clinicians should be aware of this high failure rate when managing mild exacerbations of COPD at home.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".