MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761392203 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.e38a

18: Perceived Utility of Respiratory Virus Testing for Febrile Infants Under Six-Weeks of Age Among Canadian Pediatric Emergency and Inpatient Physicians

2015· article· en· W2761392203 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brett Burnstein, Caroline Quach, AS Dubrovsky

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsEmergency medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Well appearing febrile infants with viral illnesses cannot be easily distinguished from those with occult life-threatening infections by history and physical exam alone. This national practice variation study sought to assess current approaches to febrile infants under 6-weeks of age, and determine how management is influenced by respiratory virus testing. A scenario-based survey describing two hypothetical cases of febrile infants without a focus aged 3- and 5-weeks was sent to ED and inpatient physicians at all of the 15 tertiary pediatric centers across Canada. Participants were asked multiple-choice questions regarding management decisions with and without results of respiratory virus testing. χ2 testing was used to compare proportions. Response rate was 78% (n=329; 190 ED physicians, 139 inpatient physicians). Investigations most commonly performed for both 3- and 5-week old infants were urine culture, urine analysis, CBC and blood culture. Lumbar puncture was performed less frequently in 5-week old infants (49% vs. 93%, P<0.0001). Conversely, respiratory virus testing was performed more frequently among 3-week old infants (46% vs. 34%, P<0.05). Older infant age decreased rate of admission, however detection of a respiratory virus further reduced admissions among both 3-week (83% vs. 95%, P<0.001) and 5-week old infants (36% vs. 52%, P<0.001). Similarly, empiric antibiotic treatment was initiated less frequently in older infants, and was further reduced by detection of a respiratory virus among both 3-week (65% vs. 92%, P<0.001) and 5-week old infants (25% vs. 39%, P<0.001). Inpatient physicians were more likely than ED physicians to admit (68% vs. 41%, P<0.001) and start antibiotic therapy (52% vs. 30%, P<0.001) in 5-week old infants. Among inpatient physicians, 81% would discharge 5-week old infants in ≤24 h with a detectable respiratory virus and otherwise negative workup; whereas admission duration among 3-week old infants was highly variable. The management of febrile infants under 6-weeks differs between ED and inpatient physicians, and by infant age. Respiratory virus testing could potentially reduce admissions and empirical antimicrobial treatment, as well as permit earlier discharge. Establishment of clinical guidelines for this patient population is warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicRespiratory viral infections research→French-language works237,207→