Antibiotic Use for Inpatient Bronchiolitis: Did National Guidelines Impact Practice at a Pediatric Hospital?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Bronchiolitis is a common lower respiratory tract infection that affects infants and young children. Because of variability in physician practice, inpatient management varies among pediatricians. In 2014, the Canadian Pediatric Society published national guidelines aimed at standardizing the inpatient management of this illness, which included recommending against the need for antibiotics for most patients. The study objective was to evaluate antibiotic prescription and supportive investigations for inpatient management of bronchiolitis before and after the publication of national guidelines. METHODS: This study was a single-center retrospective chart review of inpatients with bronchiolitis. We included healthy children 1 to 24 months of age who were admitted from November 2011 to October 2016. Those admitted before December 2014 were analyzed in the preguidelines cohort; the remaining, in the postguidelines cohort. The main outcome was antibiotic prescription. The secondary outcome was the frequency of chest radiographs, nasopharyngeal swabs, and blood cultures. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were included in the first cohort; 71, in the second cohort. The rates of antibiotic initiation were almost equal in both cohorts (∼44%; P = .98). More antibiotics were discontinued during hospitalization in the second cohort compared with the first cohort (10% vs 20%; P = .001). Significantly fewer patients were discharged with antibiotics in the second cohort (31% vs 16%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed a reduction in antibiotic use after the release of national guidelines, illustrating that antibiotic prescribing practices can change. However, there is still a pressing need for local initiatives to continue to reduce the unnecessary use of antibiotics within the pediatric setting.
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 | 0.005 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".