Assessing, treating and preventing community acquired pneumonia in older adults: findings from a community-wide survey of emergency room and family physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Respiratory infections, like pneumonia, represent an important threat to the health of older Canadians. Our objective was to determine, at a community level, family and emergency room physicians' knowledge and beliefs about community acquired pneumonia (CAP) in older adults and to describe their self-reported assessment, management and prevention strategies. METHODS: All active ER and family physicians in Brant County received a mailed questionnaire. An advance notification letter and three follow-up mailings were used to maximize physician participation rate. The questionnaire collected information about physicians' assessment, management, and prevention strategies for CAP in older adults (>or=60 years of age) plus demographic, training, and practice characteristics. The analysis highlights differences in approaches between office-based and emergency department physicians. RESULTS: Seventy-seven percent of physicians completed and returned the survey. Although only 16% of physicians were very confident in assessing CAP in older adults, more than half reported CAP to be a very important health concern in their practices. In-service training for family physicians was associated with increased confidence in CAP assessment and more frequent use of diagnostic tests. Family physicians who reported always requesting chest x-rays were also more likely to request pulse oximetry (OR 5.6, 95% CI 1.40 to 22.5) and recommend both follow-up x-rays (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 16.6) and pneumococcal vaccination (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 10.0). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study provide a snapshot of how non-specialists from a non-urban Ontario community assess, manage and prevent CAP in older adults and highlight differences between office-based and emergency department physicians. This information can guide researchers and clinicians in their efforts to improve the management and prevention of CAP in older adults.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".