MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1497897461 · doi:10.1002/alr.21072

Oral corticosteroids in the management of adult chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps: an evidence‐based review with recommendations

2012· review· en· W1497897461 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNasal polypsGuidelinePerioperativeIntensive care medicineChronic rhinosinusitisAdverse effectSystematic reviewSinusitisPopulationEvidence-based medicineMEDLINEDermatologySurgeryInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Oral steroids are commonly used in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with and without nasal polyps (CRSwNP and CRSsNP, respectively). Past reports have included evaluation of the evidence for the use of oral steroids in CRS subtypes. However, a review with evidence‐based recommendations for all CRS subtypes has never been performed. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive, evidence‐based approach for the utilization of oral steroids in the management of CRS. A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Results This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Conclusion Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.305 · 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