Admission is not Always Necessary for Patients with Community‐Acquired Pneumonia in Risk Classes IV and V Diagnosed in the Emergency Room
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors that allow patients with community-acquired pneumonia who are at high risk of mortality (risk classes IV and V) to be treated at home. DESIGN: A prospective, observational study. SETTING: Six hospitals and one free-standing emergency room in Edmonton, Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: The present study included 2354 patients in risk classes IV and V who had a diagnosis of pneumonia made by an emergency room physician or an internist. MEASUREMENTS: Symptoms, signs and laboratory findings, as well as outcome measures of length of stay and mortality. RESULTS: Of the total study group, 319 of the patients (13.5%) were treated on an ambulatory basis. Factors predictive of admission were definite or possible pneumonia on chest radiograph as read by a radiologist, functional impairment, altered mental status, substance abuse, psychiatric disorder, abnormal white blood cell count, abnormal lymphocyte count, oxygen saturation less than 90% and antibiotic administration in the week before admission. If chest pain was present, admission was less likely. Only two of the 319 patients required subsequent admission (both had positive blood cultures) and only two died. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of patients in risk classes IV and V can be safely treated at home. Factors that help clinicians to select this subset of patients are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".