Oral corticosteroid prescribing habits of Canadian Otolaryngologist-Head and Neck Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral corticosteroids (OCSs) are widely prescribed in Otolaryngology-Head & Neck surgery (OtoHNS). There is evidence in the literature regarding specific dosing regimens. However, it is not known to what extent these recommendations are being implemented in practice. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was sent to Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery members (N = 696). Dosing, frequency and tapering of OCSs were assessed in acute rhino-sinusitis (ARS), chronic rhino-sinusitis with (CRSwP) and without polyps (CRSsP), sudden sensori-neural hearing loss (SSNHL), and idiopathic facial nerve/Bell's palsy (IFN). Participants were asked to complete for conditions treated and results were compared with current guidelines. Development of prescribing habits and observed complications were also explored. RESULTS: 124 surveys (18%) were completed. In CRSwP (N = 98), the median dose was 50 mg (Range: 10-100 mg) and the average duration was 8 days (Range: 1-21 days). In CRSsP (N = 29), the median dose was 50 mg (Range: 20-80 mg) and the average duration was 8 days (Range: 1-14 days). In SSNHL (N = 118), the median dose was 60 mg (Range: 10-120 mg) and the average duration was 10 days (Range: 1-21 days). In IFN (N = 108), the median dose was 50 mg (Range: 10-100 mg) and the average duration was 10 days (Range: 1-21 days). Tapering dosages were used in treating CRSwP (64%), CRSsP (62%), ARS (44%), SSNHL (60%) and IFN (53%). Respondents most frequently perceived "Mentor/Preceptor Guidance" as a source of their prescribing habits. CONCLUSION: There is significant heterogeneity in OCS prescribing habits despite the availability of fairly consistent evidence in the literature for some of the surveyed conditions. Improvements in standardization should be made with the aim of enhancing outcomes and reducing complications.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".