Evaluation of compliance with the 2017 Canadian Paediatric Society Position Statement for the management of newborns at risk for early-onset sepsis: A retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Due to the nonspecific clinical presentation, clinicians often empirically treat newborns at risk of early-onset sepsis (EOS). Recently, the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) published updated recommendations that promote a more judicious approach to EOS management. OBJECTIVE: To examine the compliance with the CPS statement at a tertiary perinatal site and characterize the types of deviations. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for all term and late pre-term newborns at risk for sepsis, between January 1 and June 30, 2018. The prevalence of newborns with EOS risk factors was measured during the first month. Management strategies for eligible newborns during the 6-month period were compared to the CPS recommendations to establish the rate of noncompliance. The type of noncompliance, readmission rate, and rate of culture-positive EOS were examined. RESULTS: In the first month, 29% (66 of 228) of newborns had EOS risk factors. Among the 100 newborns born in the 6-month period for whom the CPS recommendations apply, 47 (47%) received noncompliant management. Of those, 51% (N=24) had inappropriately initiated investigations, 17% (N=8) had inappropriate antibiotics, and 32% (N=15) had both. The rate of readmission for a septic workup was 1.6% (N= 2). None had culture-positive sepsis while admitted. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of term and late preterm newborns (29%) had EOS risk factors, but none had culture-confirmed EOS. The rate of noncompliance with the CPS recommendations was high (47%), mainly due to overzealous management. Future initiatives should aim at increasing compliance, particularly in newborns at lower EOS risk.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".