MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prevalence of Para-Pneumonic Effusion and the Associated Factors among Children: A 3-Year Experience in a Single Tertiary Hospital

2024· article· en· W4396220031 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yousef Alanazi, Abdullatif Alkhurayji, Omar Alawni, Hamad Alkhalaf

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Health and Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsTertiary careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Previous studies have highlighted the significant morbidity associated with para-pneumonic effusions in pediatric populations. However, comprehensive data on the prevalence and associated factors in children remain limited, particularly in tertiary care settings. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted over a three-year period at a single tertiary hospital. Medical records of pediatric patients diagnosed with pneumonia were reviewed to identify cases of para-pneumonic effusion. The study analyzed demographic data, clinical presentations, laboratory findings, and management approaches to determine factors associated with the development of para-pneumonic effusions. Results: 150 patients were identified with para-pneumonic effusions. The majority of patients with effusions were male (60%) and under five years of age (70%). Factors significantly associated with the development of effusions included the presence of comorbidities (p<0.01), higher CRP levels (p<0.05), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (p<0.001). The length of hospital stay was notably longer in patients with effusions than those without (p<0.001). Conclusion: The study found a considerable prevalence of para-pneumonic effusions among children with pneumonia in a tertiary hospital setting. Notably, associated factors were underlying comorbidities, elevated inflammatory markers, and hospital-acquired infections. These findings underscore the need for heightened surveillance and tailored management strategies in high-risk pediatric populations to mitigate the impact of effusions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Health and NutritionSame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207