National Survey on the Emergency Department Management of Febrile Infants 29 to 60 Days Old With an Abnormal Urinalysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recent clinical practice guidelines recommend that decisions regarding lumbar puncture (LP) for febrile infants older than 28 days should no longer be based on urinalysis results, but rather independently determined by inflammatory markers and sometimes guided by shared decision-making (SDM). This study sought to assess management decisions for febrile infants aged 29 to 60 days with an abnormal urinalysis. METHODS: A scenario-based survey was sent to emergency department physicians at all 15 Canadian tertiary pediatric centers. Participants were asked questions regarding management decisions when presented with a well-appearing febrile infant in the second month of life with either an abnormal or normal urinalysis. RESULTS: Response rate was 50.2% (n = 116/231). Overall, few respondents would perform an LP based on either an abnormal or normal urinalysis alone (10.3% and 6.0%, respectively). However, regression analysis demonstrated that decisions regarding LP were influenced by urinalysis results ( P < 0.001), with respondents more likely to defer to inflammatory marker results for infants with a normal urinalysis result (57.8%) compared with those with an abnormal urinalysis (28.4%). Hospitalization (62.1%) and empiric antibiotic treatment by intravenous route (87.9%) were both frequent for low-risk infants with an abnormal urinalysis. Nearly half of respondents reported rarely (<25% of encounters) engaging families in SDM regarding LP decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge translation initiatives reflecting current evidence should target use of inflammatory markers rather than urinalysis results to guide decisions regarding LP. Efforts emphasizing outpatient management with oral antibiotics and SDM for low-risk infants with an abnormal urinalysis could also further align management with current evidence and guidelines.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".