Adherence to antibiotic guidelines for pneumonia in chronic-care facilities in Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate adherence to antibiotic recommendations for the treatment of pneumonia in patients who receive long-term care and to assess outcomes associated with these recommendations. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Twenty-two facilities that provide long-term care in southern Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults treated with antibiotics for a presumptive diagnosis of pneumonia and those with radiologically confirmed pneumonia METHODS: Over a 12-month period, older patients who were treated with antibiotics for presumptive pneumonia were prospectively identified. A random sample of these antibiotic courses (646 courses in 638 patients) was reviewed using a standardized data collection form, and demographic and clinical data were collected. Antibiotic courses were classified according to Canadian and American Thoracic Society antibiotic recommendations for pneumonia. In patients with radiologically confirmed pneumonia, the effect of adherence to these recommendations on mortality and persistence of symptoms was assessed. RESULTS: Only 27.6% (178 of 646) of antibiotic prescriptions evaluated met antibiotic recommendations for nursing-home-acquired pneumonia, and the proportion meeting these varied greatly by facility, ranging from 0% to 53% (median 31%). For patients with radiologically confirmed pneumonia, age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-2.4, per increase in 10 yr, p = 0.02), sex (adjusted OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.1-8.0, p = 0.03), and adherence to recommended antibiotics (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.3-7.2, p = 0.01) were associated with death. Adherence to the recommended antibiotics was also associated with adverse reactions, which occurred in 10% of prescriptions meeting the recommendations (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.6, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to recommended guidelines for antibiotic treatment was low and highly variable among study facilities. Use of recommended antibiotic regimens was associated with increased adverse events and worse outcomes in patients with radiologically confirmed pneumonia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".