Video Discharge Instructions for Acute Otitis Media in Children: A Randomized Controlled Open‐label Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thirty percent of children with acute otitis media (AOM) experience symptoms < 7 days after initiating treatment, highlighting the importance of comprehensive discharge instructions. METHODS: We randomized caregivers of children 6 months to 17 years presenting to the emergency department (ED) with AOM to discharge instructions using a video on management of pain and fever to a paper handout. The primary outcome was the AOM Severity of Symptom (AOM-SOS) score at 72 hours postdischarge. Secondary outcomes included caregiver knowledge (10-item survey), absenteeism, recidivism, and satisfaction (5-item Likert scale). RESULTS: A total of 219 caregivers were randomized and 149 completed the 72-hour follow-up (72 paper and 77 video). The median (IQR) AOM-SOS score for the video was significantly lower than paper, even after adjusting for preintervention AOM-SOS score and medication at home (8 [7-11] vs. 10 [7-13], respectively; p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between video and paper in mean (±SD) knowledge score (9.2 [±1.3] vs. 8.8 [±1.8], respectively; p = 0.07), mean (±SD) number of children that returned to a health care provider (8/77 vs. 10/72, respectively; p = 0.49), mean (±SD) number of daycare/school days missed by child (1.2 [±1.5] vs. 1.1 [±2.1], respectively; p = 0.62), mean (±SD) number of workdays missed by caregiver (0.5 [±1] vs. 0.8 [±2], respectively; p = 0.05), or median (IQR) satisfaction score (5 [4-5] vs. 5 [4-5], respectively; p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Video discharge instructions in the ED are associated with less perceived AOM symptomatology compared to a paper handout.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".