MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2803769102 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxy054.112

ANTIBIOTIC USE FOR INPATIENT BRONCHIOLITIS: DID NATIONAL GUIDELINES CHANGE PRACTICE?

2018· article· en· W2803769102 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alison Lopez

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBronchiolitisGuidelineCohortPediatricsRetrospective cohort studyMedical prescriptionCohort studyLower respiratory tract infectionRespiratory tract infectionsEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Millions of infants and young children are affected by bronchiolitis annually around the globe. This viral lower respiratory tract infection often results in hospital admissions, thus impacting the cost of the healthcare system. Because of its heterogeneous clinical presentation, inpatient management practices amongst paediatricians varies widely. The publication of national guidelines by the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) in 2014 was aimed at decreasing the use of unnecessary investigations and therapies for inpatient management of bronchiolitis. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the levels of antibiotic prescriptions and supportive investigations for inpatient management of bronchiolitis before and after the publication of national guidelines. DESIGN/METHODS This study is a single-centre retrospective chart review of inpatients with confirmed cases of bronchiolitis. We included children with no other relevant co-morbidities, aged 1- 24 months, who were admitted from November 2011 – October 2016. We excluded those who were born less than 35 weeks gestational age and patients with chronic complex medical problems. Our inclusion and exclusion criteria mirrored those used in the CPS guidelines. Those admitted prior to December 2014 were analysed in the pre-guidelines cohort and the remaining were placed in the post-guidelines cohort. The main outcome was antibiotic prescription during the hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of chest x-rays, nasopharyngeal swabs, and blood cultures. RESULTS 131 patients were included in the first (pre-guideline) cohort and 71 in the second (post- guideline) cohort. The overall initiation of antibiotics was almost equal in both cohorts, regardless of whether a chest x-ray was ordered (p=1.000). There was no significant difference in the number of chest x-rays ordered between cohorts (p=0.099). The percentage of patients discharged on antibiotics were significantly lower in the second cohort (p=0.018). More antibiotics were discontinued after a viral cause was isolated in the second cohort (p=0.001). The gender distribution, mean age and mean length of stay were almost equivalent between the cohorts. CONCLUSION Our study did not show a significant change in antibiotic prescription despite the release of national guidelines. We found that isolating a viral aetiology often leads to the discontinuation of antibiotics. This study emphasizes the need for local antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the use of unnecessary antibiotics.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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