Child Care Center Staff Contribute to Physician Visits and Pressure for Antibiotic Prescription
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether child care center (CCC) providers contribute to unnecessary physician referrals and antibiotic prescriptions in young children with upper respiratory tract infections. DESIGN: A survey using a structured telephone questionnaire between May 3, 1998, and July 27, 1998. PARTICIPANTS: Child care center providers from randomly selected licensed Ontario CCCs accepting diapered children. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning physician referral; exclusion; and antibiotic use for children with upper respiratory tract infections. Indications for exclusion were compared with published Canadian guidelines. RESULTS: Contact was made with 42 eligible CCCs to obtain the requisite number of 36 participants (participation rate, 86%). Of the 36 centers, staff reported advising that children visit a physician for colored nasal discharge in 28 (78%), for productive cough in 23 (64%), and for unusual behavior in 9 (25%). Also of the 36 centers, staff reported excluding children for colored nasal discharge in 20 (56%), for productive cough in 16 (44%), and for unusual behavior in 15 (42%). Antibiotics were thought useful for nonspecific upper respiratory tract infections to prevent the spread of infection in 9 (26%), to speed up recovery in 7 (21%), and to prevent bacterial infection in 13 (38%) of 34 centers. In the previous 6 months, 25 (69%) of 36 staff members reported making an exception to exclusion because a child had an antibiotic prescription. CONCLUSIONS: Many children are referred by CCC staff to physicians contrary to established guidelines. As staff must act on behalf of parents, a low threshold for referral is not unreasonable. However, this survey confirms that CCC staff recommend children to receive antibiotics and exclude children inappropriately. These practices are based on incomplete knowledge. Research on appropriate management of upper respiratory tract infections by CCC staff is needed. Education to correct specific knowledge deficits should be initiated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".