The Association between Prolonged Antibiotic Use in Culture Negative Infants and Length of Hospital Stay and Total Hospital Costs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if prolonged antibiotic use at birth in neonates with a negative blood culture increases the total cost of hospital stay. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study performed at a 60-bed level IV neonatal intensive care unit. Neonates born <30 weeks of gestation or <1,500 g between 2016 and 2018 who received antibiotics were included. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to determine if clinical factors contributed to increased hospital cost or length of stay. RESULTS: In total, 190 patients met inclusion criteria with 94 infants in the prolonged antibiotic group and 96 in the control group. Prolonged antibiotic use was associated with an increase length of hospital stay of approximately 31.87 days, resulting in a $69,946 increase in total cost of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Prolonged antibiotics in neonates with negative blood culture were associated with significantly longer hospital length of stay and increased total cost of hospitalization. KEY POINTS: · Prolonged antibiotic use at birth is associated with prolonged hospital stay.. · Prolonged antibiotic use at birth is associated with increased cost of hospitalization.. · Prolonged antibiotic use at birth is associated with increased days on total parenteral nutrition.. · Prolonged antibiotic use at birth is associated with increased subsequent courses of 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".