Hematochezia in children with acute diarrhea seeking emergency department care – a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although the passage of blood in stools in children represents a medical emergency, children seeking emergency department (ED) care remain poorly characterized. Our primary objective was to compare clinical characteristics and etiologic pathogens in children with acute diarrhea with and without caregiver-reported hematochezia. Secondary objectives were to characterize interventions and resource utilization. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the Alberta Provincial Pediatric EnTeric Infection TEam (APPETITE) database. Children <18 years presenting to two pediatric EDs within a 24-hour period and <7 days of symptoms were consecutively recruited. RESULTS: Of 1,061 participants, 115 (10.8%) reported hematochezia at the enrollment visit at which time those with hematochezia, compared to those without, had more diarrheal episodes/24-hour period (9 vs. 6; difference: 2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0, 4.0; p < 0.001), and were less likely to have experienced vomiting (54.8% vs. 80.2%; difference: -25.4; 95% CI: -34.9, -16.0; p < 0.001). They were more likely to receive intravenous fluids (33.0% vs. 17.9%; difference: 15.2; 95% CI: 6.2, 24.1; p < 0.001) and require repeat health care visits (45.5% vs. 34.7%; difference: 10.7; 95% CI: 0.9, 20.6; p = 0.03). A bacterial pathogen was identified in 33.0% of children with hematochezia versus 7.9% without (difference: 25.1; 95% CI: 16.3, 33.9; p < 0.001); viruses were detected in 31.3% of children with hematochezia compared to 72.3% in those without (difference: -41.0%, 95% CI: -49.9, -32.1; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In children with acute diarrhea, caregiver report of hematochezia, compared to the absence of hematochezia, was associated with more diarrheal but fewer vomiting episodes, and greater resource consumption. The former group of children was also more likely to have bacteria detected in their stool.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".