MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116509186 · doi:10.1186/cc13096

Clinical stakeholders’ opinions on the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in critically ill patients in intensive care units: an international Delphi study

2013· article· en· W2116509186 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian H. Cuthbertson, Marion Campbell, Graeme MacLennan, Eilidh Duncan, Andrea P. Marshall, Elisabeth C. Wells, Maria Prior, Laura Todd, Louise Rose, Ian Seppelt, Geoff Bellingan, Jill Francis

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsTrillium Therapeutics (Canada)University of GuelphHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersHealth Technology Assessment ProgrammeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSydney Medical SchoolChief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care DirectorateMcMaster UniversityAustralian and New Zealand College of AnaesthetistsDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of AberdeenGriffith UniversityGeorge Institute for Global HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchScottish GovernmentUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityIntensive Care FoundationUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineCritically illDelphi methodIntensive care medicineIntensive careIntensive care unitDigestive tractHuman decontaminationNursingMedical emergencyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) is a prophylactic antibiotic regimen that is not widely used in practice. We aimed to describe the opinions of key 'stakeholders' about the validity of the existing evidence base, likely consequences of implementation, relative importance of their opinions in influencing overall practice, likely barriers to implementation and perceptions of the requirement for further research to inform the decision about whether to embark on a further large randomised controlled trial. METHODS: This was a Delphi study informed by comprehensive framework of possible determinants of health professionals' behaviour to study Critical Care practice in four countries. There were four key stakeholder participant groups including ICU physicians, pharmacists, clinical leads, and clinical microbiologists/ infectious disease physicians. Round one comprised participant interviews and Rounds two and three were online questionnaires using Delphi method. RESULTS: In this study, 141 participants were recruited of whom 82% were retained. Participants rated themselves as knowledgeable about SDD. Antibiotic resistance was identified as the most important issue. SDD was seen as a low clinical priority but few participants reported strong opposition. There was moderate agreement that research to date has not adequately addressed concerns about antibiotic resistance and lacks generalizability. Participants indicated equipoise with regard to benefits and harms of SDD, and indicated strong support for a further randomised trial. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have clinical equipoise about the effectiveness of SDD. Future research requires longer follow up to assess antibiotic resistance as well as greater validity/generalizability to provide definitive answers on the effectiveness of decontamination and effects on antibiotic resistance. SDD was regarded as not being a high clinical priority, which may limit future trial participation. These results have identified that further large randomised controlled trial of SDD in critical care is both warranted and appropriate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicNosocomial Infections in ICUFrench-language works237,207