Review: delayed or immediate antibiotic prescriptions have similar clinical outcomes in respiratory infectionsCommentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G Spurling Dr G Spurling, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; geoffspurling@optusnet.com.au What is the relative effectiveness of delayed, immediate, or no antibiotic (AB) prescriptions for acute respiratory infections? ### Data sources: Medline (1966 to January 2007), EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (1990–2007), Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2006), Current Contents–ISI Web of Knowledge (1998 to January 2007), and reference lists. ### Study selection and assessment: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared prescriptions of delayed ABs (>48 h) with immediate ABs or no ABs for acute respiratory tract infections (sore throat, otitis media, or common cold) in patients of any age. 9 RCTs met the selection criteria and had quality scores ⩾6 out of 11 (high quality). ### Outcomes: included clinical outcomes (pain, fever, malaise, or cough), AB use, and patient satisfaction. Sore throat : delayed …
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 | 0.005 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".