Experience with Levofloxacin in a Critical Pathway for the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality in both developed and developing countries. Despite research into the optimal management of this condition, there remains great variation in how patients with CAP are treated. A study was performed to assess the results of CAP treatment using a clinical pathway that incorporated admission guidelines, standard treatment orders with oral levofloxacin or cefuroxime axetil plus azithromycin, and an algorithm for oxygen therapy and discharge. The study involved seven centers enrolling 7,734 patients, 55% of whom were treated as outpatients and the remainder were admitted. Overall mortality was 8%, and increasing severity of illness, as assessed by pneumonia severity risk score, was associated with early mortality (within five days of admission) and late mortality (five or more days following admission). The use of the clinical pathway was associated with a reduction in early mortality. The use of levofloxacin alone or with cefuroxime axetil plus azithromycin was associated with decreased mortality compared with the use of other antibiotics.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it