MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Corticosteroids for preventing relapse following acute exacerbations of asthma

2007· review· en· W1742527762 on OpenAlex
Brian H. Rowe, Carol Spooner, Francine M. Ducharme, Jennifer A. Bretzlaff, Gary W. Bota

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

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsSudbury Regional HospitalMontreal Children's HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentAsthmaPlaceboRandomized controlled trialExacerbationRelative riskConfidence intervalBronchospasmPediatricsEmergency medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acute asthma is responsible for many emergency department (ED) visits annually. Between 12 to 16% will relapse to require additional interventions within two weeks of ED discharge. Treatment of acute asthma is based on rapid reversal of bronchospasm and reducing airway inflammation. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefit of corticosteroids (oral, intramuscular, or intravenous) for the treatment of asthmatic patients discharged from an acute care setting (i.e. usually the emergency department) after assessment and treatment of an acute asthmatic exacerbation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles. In addition, authors of all included studies were contacted to locate unpublished studies. The most recent search was run in October 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing two types of corticosteroids (oral, intra-muscular, or inhaled) with placebo for outpatient treatment of asthmatic exacerbations in adults or children. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials involving 374 people were included. One study used intramuscular corticosteroids, five studies used oral corticosteroids. The review was split into two reviews and although the latest search yielded no additional placebo controlled trials an additional IM study was included. Significantly fewer patients in the corticosteroid group relapsed to receive additional care in the first week (Relative risk (RR) 0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2 to 0.74). This favourable effect was maintained over the first 21 days (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.89) and there were fewer subsequent hospitalizations (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.95). Patients receiving corticosteroids had less need for beta(2)-agonists (mean difference (MD) -3.3 activations/day; 95% CI -5.6 to -1.0). Changes in pulmonary function tests (SMD 0.045; 95% CI -0.47 to 0.56) and side effects (SMD 0.03; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.44) in the first 7 to 10 days, while rarely reported, showed no significant differences between the treatment groups. Statistically significant heterogeneity was identified for the side effect results; all other outcomes were homogeneous. From these results, as few as ten patients need to be treated to prevent relapse to additional care after an exacerbation of asthma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A short course of corticosteroids following assessment for an asthma exacerbation significantly reduces the number of relapses to additional care, hospitalizations and use of short-acting beta(2)-agonist without an apparent increase in side effects. Intramuscular and oral corticosteroids are both effective.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.304 · 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