Adherence of Families to a Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis Protocol Used in a Pediatric Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In an effort to limit inappropriate antibiotic use for children with pharyngitis, our pediatric emergency department (PED) has implemented a strep throat protocol using preprinted prescriptions given to families pending pharyngeal swab results. We sought to determine the rate of adherence of families managed with this protocol and to identify whether clinical features are associated with adherence. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of children aged 2 to 17 years presented to the PED with suspected group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis. Prescription-filling activity was tracked using a novel carbon-copy prescription and compared with throat swab result. Health records were reviewed for demographic and clinical information. Adherence was defined as prescriptions being filled after notification of a positive swab result and prescriptions not being filled when throat swab result was negative. RESULTS: Three hundred nine children were screened for GAS pharyngitis. One hundred swabs (32.4%) were positive for GAS pharyngitis, of which 15 prescriptions were filled before swab results. No record of prescription filling was found for 37 of the children with positive swab results. Only 9 families (4.3%) filled the prescription when the swab result was negative. Overall, 247 families (80.2%) were adherent to the protocol. Families of children aged 2 to 5 years were more likely to be adherent than those aged 13 to 17 years (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-10.66). CONCLUSIONS: Most families are adherent to our GAS pharyngitis protocol. Very few families filled prescriptions when the swab result was negative. Age was the only factor influencing adherence. Our current GAS pharyngitis protocol is an effective management strategy for children presenting with pharyngitis to the PED.
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 | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".