MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415151073 · doi:10.1017/ash.2025.10182

Contact precautions in a palliative care unit: a retrospective chart review at a canadian tertiary hospital

2025· review· en· W4415151073 on OpenAlexaffabout
Henry He, Shannon Bunn, Brittany Rance

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careRetrospective cohort studyChartTertiary careMEDLINEResuscitation Orders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective: To characterize the incidence of contact precautions (CPs) on a palliative care unit (PCU) at a tertiary hospital in Canada. Design: Descriptive retrospective chart review. Setting: Palliative care unit. Participants: Adults admitted to the PCU who were placed on CPs during admission. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on all PCU admissions for 25 months from September 24, 2022, to October 29, 2024. Patient orders, clinical notes, medication records, microbiology results, and transport documentation were reviewed. A descriptive and basic comparative statistical analysis was performed. Results: CPs were used in 13 of 549 patient encounters (2.37%), with an incidence of 2.02 per 1,000 PCU patient-days. Indications included known MRSA (5/13), suspected CPO (4/13), new MRSA (3/13), and known vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (1/13). The mean duration of CPs was 15.4 ± 14.1 (range 0.2–47.8) days. Mean hospital and PCU lengths of stay in the CP group were 24.8 ± 14.7 and 14.6 ± 14.8 days, respectively, compared to 23.8 ± 31.3 and 11.7 ± 11.7 days in the non-CP group ( P = .816 for hospital stay; P = .491 for PCU stay). No significant differences were observed between groups in age, sex, or length of stay. Antibiotics were used in 9/13 patients, and 5/13 patients remained on CPs until death on the PCU. Conclusions: This study is the first known retrospective review of CP use in palliative care. Further research is needed to explore its impact on infection outcomes, mortality, and patient-centered measures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.341 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare EpidemiologySame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207