MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127614400 · doi:10.1183/13993003.02990-2020

European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of children and adolescents with bronchiectasis

2021· article· en· W3127614400 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anne B. Chang, Rebecca Fortescue, Keith Grimwood, Efthymia Alexopoulou, Leanne Bell, Jeanette Boyd, Andrew Bush, James D. Chalmers, Adam T. Hill, Bülent Karadağ, Fabio Midulla, Gabrielle B. McCallum, Zena Powell, Deborah Snijders, Woo‐Jung Song, Thomy Tonia, Christine Wilson, Angela Zacharasiewicz, Ahmad Kantar

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster UniversityNational Health and Medical Research CouncilEuropean Respiratory Society
KeywordsMedicineBronchiectasisGuidelineIntensive care medicineQuality of life (healthcare)AsthmaPediatricsPsychological interventionFamily medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineNursingPathologyLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing awareness of bronchiectasis in children and adolescents, a chronic pulmonary disorder associated with poor quality of life for the child/adolescent and their parents, recurrent exacerbations, and costs to the family and health systems. Optimal treatment improves clinical outcomes. Several national guidelines exist, but there are no international guidelines.The European Respiratory Society (ERS) Task Force for the management of paediatric bronchiectasis sought to identify evidence-based management (investigation and treatment) strategies. It used the ERS standardised methodology that included a systematic review of the literature and application of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to define the quality of the evidence and level of recommendations.A multidisciplinary team of specialists in paediatric and adult respiratory medicine, infectious disease, physiotherapy, primary care, nursing, radiology, immunology, methodology, patient advocacy and parents of children/adolescents with bronchiectasis considered the most relevant clinical questions (for both clinicians and patients) related to managing paediatric bronchiectasis. 14 key clinical questions (seven PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) and seven narrative) were generated. The outcomes for each PICO were decided by voting by the panel and parent/patient advisory group.This guideline addresses the definition, diagnostic approach and antibiotic treatment of exacerbations, pathogen eradication, long-term antibiotic therapy, asthma-type therapies (inhaled corticosteroids and bronchodilators), mucoactive drugs, airway clearance, investigation of underlying causes of bronchiectasis, disease monitoring, factors to consider before surgical treatment, and the reversibility and prevention of bronchiectasis in children/adolescents. Benchmarking quality of care for children/adolescents with bronchiectasis to improve clinical outcomes and evidence gaps for future research could be based on these recommendations.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.017

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations222
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207