Pleurodesis practice for malignant pleural effusions in five English-speaking countries: survey of pulmonologists.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pleurodesis is important in the management of malignant pleural effusions, but no consensus exists on the optimal agent or methods of pleurodesis. How pleurodesis is practiced worldwide has not been studied. OBJECTIVES: To identify variations in the clinical practice of pleurodesis in major English-speaking countries, and to quantify the experience of pulmonologists on the effectiveness and adverse effects of different pleurodesis agents worldwide. METHODS: Eight hundred fifty-nine pulmonologists practicing in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand participated in a Web-based survey. RESULTS: The respondents collectively perform > 8,300 pleurodesis annually. Talc was the preferred agent by most respondents (slurry, 56%; poudrage, 12%), followed by tetracycline derivatives (26%), and bleomycin (7%). Differences were seen in pleurodesis practice patterns among practitioners among and within the surveyed countries. Physicians' overall satisfaction with the available pleurodesis agents was modest (5.0 out of 8), and the reported success rate averaged only 66%. Talc (both poudrage and slurry) was perceived as significantly more effective, but was associated with significantly more pain, nausea, and fever (p < 0.05). Respiratory failure occurred more commonly with talc poudrage than with other agents (p < 0.05), and had been observed by 70% and 54% of physicians who used talc poudrage and slurry, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variations exist in how pleurodesis is performed worldwide. Pleurodesis agents currently available are perceived as suboptimal. Talc poudrage and slurry were perceived to be more effective, but were associated with more complications, including respiratory failure.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".