Guideline-Concordant Therapy and Reduced Mortality and Length of Stay in Adults With Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Clinical practice guidelines for empirical CAP treatment, formulated jointly by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and American Thoracic Society (ATS), remain controversial and inconsistently applied. We evaluated the impact of guideline-concordant therapy on in-hospital survival and other outcomes using a large database including adults treated for CAP in both community and tertiary care hospitals. METHODS: We evaluated the association between in-hospital survival and guideline-concordant therapy using logistic regression models. Time until discharge from hospital and discontinuation of parenteral therapy were evaluated using survival analysis. RESULTS: Of 54 619 non-intensive care unit inpatients with CAP hospitalized at 113 community hospitals and tertiary care centers, 35 477 (65%) received initial guideline-concordant therapy. After adjustment for severity of illness and other confounders, guideline-concordant therapy was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.77), sepsis (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96), and renal failure (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.94), and reduced both length of stay and duration of parenteral therapy by approximately 0.6 days (P < .001 for both comparisons). These findings were robust with alternate definitions of "concordance" and were linked to treatment with fluoroquinolone or macrolide agents. CONCLUSIONS: Guideline-concordant therapy for CAP is associated with improved health outcomes and diminished resource use in adults. The mechanisms underlying this finding remain speculative and warrant further study, but our findings nonetheless support compliance with CAP clinical practice guidelines as a benchmark of quality of care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".