Clinical Practice Variation Among Pediatric Rheumatologists Treating Kawasaki Disease: Results of a North American Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The best treatment for children with KD who fail to respond to the first dose of IVIG (refractory KD) is currently unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine treatment practices of pediatric rheumatologists in North America who manage IVIG-refractory KD. Methods: A 34-item web-based survey was sent to 102 randomly selected members of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA). The anonymous survey addressed the use of primary intensification as well as the treatment of IVIG-refractory KD. Results: The response rate was 82%; 56% (all pediatric rheumatologists) completed the survey. Primary intensification was used for macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), KD shock, and those at high risk for coronary artery aneurysms (CAAs) by 84%, 76% and 52% of responders, respectively, with corticosteroids (CSs) used most frequently. For IVIG-refractory KD without CAA, a second dose of IVIG was used most often (63% alone; 23% plus CS). With non-giant CAAs, only 15% used a second IVIG alone, 40% used IVIG plus CS, and 35% took infliximab, usually with CS/IVIG. With giant CAA, treatments used most frequently were CS, a second IVIG, and infliximab (91%, 69%, and 58%, respectively), usually as combinations of two or more medications. Conclusions: Treatment of IVIG-refractory KD varies significantly among North American pediatric rheumatologists, particularly in the presence of CAAs. Our findings emphasize the need for research to identify the most effective therapy for this KD subgroup. The current use of primary intensification and the presence and size of the CAA will need to be considered as consensus treatment plans are developed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".