Bronchiolitis Management and Unnecessary Antibiotic Use Across 3 Canadian PICUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the patient characteristics, clinical management, and infectious etiology in critically ill children with bronchiolitis. The secondary objective was to determine the association between antibiotic use and hospital length of stay among patients without concomitant bacterial infections. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study including patients ≤2 years old with bronchiolitis admitted to 3 Canadian pediatric intensive care units between 2016 and 2018. RESULTS: We included 372 patients with a median age of 2.1 months (interquartile range 1.2-6.6) and Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score 3.0 (interquartile range 0-3.0). Initial ventilatory management included high flow nasal cannula (28.2%) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (53.7%), of which 41.9% and 87.5%, respectively, did not require escalation of ventilatory support. Chest radiographs (81.7%) and respiratory virus testing (95.4%) were performed in most patients; 14.0% received systemic steroids. Respiratory syncytial virus was detected in 61.3% patients, and 7.5% had a culture-positive concomitant bacterial infection. Of 258 (69.4%) patients with a viral infection, only 45.3% received antibiotics. In this group, antibiotic use beyond 72 hours was not associated with hospital length of stay (ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.97-1.34). CONCLUSIONS: High flow nasal canulae and noninvasive ventilation are commonly used in severe bronchiolitis. Despite contrary evidence, steroids and antibiotics were also frequently used. Evidence-based guidelines specific to children with severe bronchiolitis are needed to improve the care delivered to this patient population.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".