MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1900530682 · doi:10.2147/copd.s2624

Antibiotics used in the ambulatory management of acute COPD exacerbations

2008· article· en· W1900530682 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-France Beauchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of COPD · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalAstraZeneca (Canada)Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCOPDExacerbationAntibioticsCefuroximeAmbulatoryMedical prescriptionIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCohortPopulationEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of COPDSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207