National differences in incidence of acute mastoiditis: relationship to prescribing patterns of antibiotics for acute otitis media?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Operating on the principle that most acute otitis media (AOM) episodes resolve without antibiotics, doctors in the Netherlands usually manage AOM in children with initial observation. Prescription of antibiotics is limited to children with a complicated course of AOM and those categorized as high risk. Consequently only 31% of patients with AOM receives antibiotics, compared with >90% in most other countries. OBJECTIVE: To substantiate the suggestion that this restrictive use of antibiotics leads to a higher incidence of acute mastoiditis. METHODS: A comparative study across several European countries, Canada, Australia and the United States was performed in the period 1991 to 1998. The incidence rate of acute mastoiditis was defined as the total number of patients age 14 years and younger discharged from all hospitals with the primary diagnosis of acute mastoiditis, during a specified period (usually 5 years), divided by the number of person years (py) in that same age range and period. The latter was calculated by totaling the midyear population estimate of children age 14 years and younger of each year. The 95% confidence intervals and incidence rate ratios were calculated to compare the observed rates. RESULTS: The incidence rate of acute mastoiditis in the Netherlands, with a low antibiotic prescription rate for AOM, was 3.8/100,000 py; in Norway and Denmark, with high prescription rates, the incidence rate was comparable at 3.5/100,000 py and 4.2/100,000 py, respectively. In all other countries with very high prescription rates, incidence rates were considerably lower, ranging from 1.2 to 2.0/100,000 py. The incidence rate in the Netherlands was about twice that in the United States (rate ratio, 0.5). CONCLUSION: The incidence rate of acute mastoiditis in the Netherlands is higher than in many countries with higher antibiotic prescription rates. Although the potential benefits of restricted use of antibiotics (i.e. cost reduction, fewer side effects from antibiotics and less antimicrobial resistance) are beyond dispute, such strategy may be associated with a somewhat higher incidence of acute mastoiditis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".