MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601839626 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001107

Inhaled steroids for episodic viral wheeze of childhood

2000· review· en· W1601839626 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C McKean, Francine M. Ducharme

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheezeMedicinePediatricsAsthmaPlaceboRespiratory tract infectionsCorticosteroidUpper respiratory tract infectionRandomized controlled trialClinical trialInternal medicineRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recurrent episodic wheeze in association with viral upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) is a specific clinical illness distinct from persistent atopic asthma. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to identify whether corticosteroid treatment, given episodically or daily, is beneficial to children with viral episodic wheeze. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of corticosteroid treatment versus placebo in children under 17 years of age who suffer from 'episodic viral wheeze', which is defined by wheeze in association with coryzal symptoms with minimal or no intercurrent lower respiratory tract symptoms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed independently by two reviewers. Study authors were contacted for missing information. Studies were categorised according to whether treatment was given episodically or daily (maintenance). The primary outcome was episodes requiring oral corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes addressed episode severity, frequency and duration and parental treatment preference. MAIN RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials in children with a history of mild episodic viral wheeze were identified. Most of the children had previously required no or infrequent oral corticosteroids and had very infrequent hospital admissions. There were three studies of preschool children given episodic high dose inhaled corticosteroid (1.6 - 2.25 mg per day), two using a crossover and one a parallel design. The two studies of maintenance corticosteroid (400 micrograms per day) were parallel in design, one of pre-school children the other of children aged 7 -9 years. Results from the two cross-over studies of episodic high dose inhaled corticosteroids showed a reduced requirement for oral corticosteroids (Relative risk (RR)=0.53, 95% CI: 0.27, 1.04). In these 2 double blind studies, this treatment was preferred by the children's parents over placebo (RR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.48,0.87). Maintenance low dose inhaled corticosteroids did not show any clear reduction over placebo in the proportion of episodes requiring oral corticosteroids (N=2 trials, RR=0.82, 95%CI: 0.23,2.90) or in those requiring hospital admission (N=1 trial, RR=0.21, 95% CI: 0.01,4.11). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Episodic high dose inhaled corticosteroids provide a partially effective strategy for the treatment of mild episodic viral wheeze of childhood. There is no current evidence to favour maintenance low dose inhaled corticosteroids in the prevention and management of episodic mild viral induced wheeze.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.302 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations184
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207