The influence over a period of 8 years of patterns of prescribing palizivumab for patients with and without congenitally malformed hearts, and in admissions to paediatric intensive care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the pattern of prescribing for palivizumab in the Glasgow area over the period 1999 through 2007, and to compare recent prescribing to the current recommendations by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation of the United Kingdom Department of Health. Our secondary objective was to describe admissions to paediatric intensive care in patients with respiratory syncytial virus receiving palivizumab. SETTING: Tertiary children's hospital out-patient immunisation clinic and paediatric intensive care unit. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of prescribing and admissions data for the period 1999 through 2007. OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of prescriptions and admissions to the paediatric intensive care unit. RESULTS: The number of children receiving palivizumab annually initially rose more than 5-fold, from 17 in the season of 1999 and 2000 versus 115 in 2004 and 2005, although it has declined in the past 2 years, to 63 in 2006 and 2007, following publication of the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation established by the United Kingdom Department of Health. There has been no significant change in demographics of patients during this period. Prior to publication of these recommendations, 35 of 44 (80%) patients with congenitally malformed hearts who received palivizumab in the season of 2005 and 2006 deviated from the current recommendations, compared to 5 of 51 (10%) who received palivizumab for non-cardiac indications. No patients who received palivizumab required admission to the paediatric intensive care unit with proven respiratory syncytial virus infection over the 8 year period. CONCLUSIONS: The number of children receiving palivizumab initially increased significantly, although it has now fallen following implementation of national recommendations. Much prescribing, particularly for children with congenitally malformed hearts, did not fulfil current recommendations. The absence of admissions to paediatric intensive care reflects the success of targeted immunisation in our population.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".