Development of a patient/proxy-reported instrument for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a patient/proxy-reported measure of the incidence and severity of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea (PAAD) in inpatient and outpatient settings. METHODS: A patient advisory group, consisting of five parents and two children, was engaged as a research partner. Instrument items were developed from three sources: relevant items from two previously validated instruments; relevant constructs from a newly developed core outcome measurement set; and outcomes identified by parents and clinicians as being the most important. In a prospective observational study, children (birth to 17 years old) newly prescribed antibiotics or on antibiotics for ≤ 7 days, were included and assessed at the time of presentation and daily thereafter until two weeks after antibiotic therapy was completed. Internal consistency and convergent validity of the instrument were examined. RESULTS: Of 78 patients who agreed to participate and met the eligibility criteria, 30(38%) were lost to follow-up; Data from the remaining 48 were analyzed. By applying four different definitions of diarrhea, we found a broad range of incidence risks of PAAD (27%-83%). PAAD was more likely to develop in younger age groups (≤ 3 years old). Cronbach's α for the severity scale was less than 0.7. A high correlation was found between the PAAD severity score and numerical rating score of diarrhea severity reported by parents (r > 0.5). CONCLUSION: The PAAD instrument is the first designed to measure the incidence and severity of PAAD. The instrument has content and construct validity. For reliability analyses of the severity scale, larger studies are required.
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 | 0.017 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".