Evaluation of Conformity of a First Prescription of Lipid-Based Formulation of Amphotericin B in a University-Teaching Pediatric Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Invasive fungal infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in immunodeficient children. Amphotericin B is an important therapeutic agent for the treatment of invasive fungal infections but is associated with significant toxicities and high acquisition costs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate physician adherence to a local guideline for the use of lipid-based amphotericin B. METHODS: The study was approved through Pharmacology & Therapeutics (P&T) committee activities. A retrospective drug utilization review (DUR) was conducted. All orders written between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2004, were reviewed. Demographic and descriptive clinical data were collected as well as variables related to the drug order process. Conformity rates were calculated for the primary objective criteria (authorized prescribers - infectious disease members; recommended drug of choice-Abelcet; accepted indications; and presence of underlying conditions). RESULTS: A total of 109 orders for 70 patients were reviewed by a single research assistant for a 2-year period. Global conformity rate for all four criteria was calculated at 7.3%. Non-conformity was mostly associated with the absence of underlying conditions (e.g., prerenal insufficiency or presence of nephrotoxicity due to amphotericin B desoxycholate) in 84.5% of the cases. Infusionrelated adverse drug reactions partly explained a switch to a non-formulary lipid-based amphotericin B product. External factors (newly published results since the adoption of the guideline and continuous marketing practices) and internal factors (availability of non-formulary process, inefficient DUR process) could have contributed to non-adherence to a local guideline. CONCLUSION: This study shows low adherence to P&T committee drug guidelines on lipid-based amphotericin B. Continuous and efficient DUR processes should be in place to monitor drug guideline adherence.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".