Palivizumab use among children with congenital heart disease in Quebec: Impact of Canadian guidelines on clinical practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Palivizumab has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization caused by respiratory syncytial virus in children with congenital heart disease (CHD). Guidelines published in 2003 by the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) stated that children younger than 24 months with hemodynamically significant CHD should be considered for up to five monthly doses of palivizumab during the winter season. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of CPS guidelines on the use of palivizumab in children with CHD. METHODS: Clinical information was reviewed on all patients with CHD who were prescribed palivizumab in 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 and who were followed by one of four paediatric cardiovascular programs in the province of Quebec. RESULTS: Palivizumab was prescribed to 45 children in 2002-2003 and to 146 children in 2003-2004. The number of children receiving more than five doses increased from 10 of 45 (22%) in 2002-2003 to 57 of 128 (45%) in 2003-2004 (P=0.008). One hundred seventeen of 146 children (80%) receiving palivizumab in 2003-2004 met the CPS guidelines versus 38 of 45 children (84%) in 2002-2003 (ie, before the guidelines were published) (P=0.66). Patients not meeting CPS criteria were older than 24 months at the time of the first dose, had hemodynamically insignificant CHD or had lesions adequately corrected by surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The number of children with CHD receiving palivizumab prophylaxis increased significantly following the publication of CPS guidelines. The majority of children were eligible for palivizumab according to the current CPS criteria. More patients received more than five doses in 2003-2004 than in 2002-2003.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".