Corticosteroids and Other Treatments Administered to Children Tested for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Emergency Departments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if corticosteroid administration is associated with a SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test-positive result and to describe therapies administered to SARS-CoV-2 infected children. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from participants recruited in 41 pediatric emergency departments (ED) in 10 countries between March 2020 and June 2021. Participants were <18 years old, had signs or symptoms of, or risk factors for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and had nucleic acid testing performed. To determine if SARS-CoV-2 test status was independently associated with corticosteroid administration, we used a multivariable conditional logistic regression model matched by study site to compare treatments administered based on SARS-CoV-2 test and disposition status. This analysis was repeated for the subgroup of study participants who were hospitalized. RESULTS: 30.3% (3,121/10,315) of participants were SARS-CoV-2-positive. Although remdesivir was more commonly administered to SARS-CoV-2-positive children, use was infrequent (25/3120 [0.8%] vs 1/7188 [0.01%]; P = .001). Corticosteroid use was less common among SARS-CoV-2-positive children (219/3120 [7.0%] vs 759/7190 [10.6%]; P < .001). Among hospitalized children, there were no differences in provision of inotropes, respiratory support, chest drainage or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between groups. Corticosteroid administration was associated with age, history of asthma, wheezing, study month, hospitalization and intensive care unit admission; it was not associated with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result overall (aOR: 0.91; 95%CI: 0.74, 1.12) or among the subgroup of those hospitalized (aOR: 1.04; 95%CI: 0.75, 1.44). CONCLUSIONS: Few disease-specific treatments are provided to SARS-CoV-2-positive children; clinical trials evaluating therapies in children are urgently needed.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".