MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1812633805 · doi:10.1155/2000/587957

A Randomised Controlled Trial of High Dose, Inhaled Budesonide Versus Oral Prednisone in Patients Discharged from the Emergency Department following an Acute Asthma Exacerbation

2000· article· en· W1812633805 on OpenAlexaff
J. Mark FitzGerald, David Shragge, Jennifer Haddon, Barbara Jennings, Joanna Lee M Math, Tony R. Bai, Peter D. Paré, David Kassen, Anton Grunfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMisericordia Community HospitalVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentPrednisoneBudesonideExacerbationAsthmaAsthma exacerbationsEmergency medicineRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Prednisone (PRED) is recommended at discharge to reduce the relapse rate following emergency treatment for an asthmatic attack. However, PRED has systemic side effects. Inhaled anti-inflammatory medications, such as budesonide (BUD), are well tolerated. This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of PRED and BUD on relapse rate. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, double dummy, parallel group design. SETTING: Tertiary referral emergency departments. POPULATION STUDIED: One hundred and eighty-five patients with acute asthma who received standard treatment with bronchodilators and systemic glucocorticosteroids in the emergency department, had a forced expiration volume in 1 s (FEV1) greater than 50% predicted and who were deemed well enough to be discharged from the emergency department. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive either BUD Turbuhaler 600 microg qid or PRED 40 mg in the morning for seven to 10 days. At discharge and final visit, symptoms, medication use, FEV1, peak expiratory flow (PEF) and quality of life (QoL) were assessed. Relapse rate to the emergency department during the follow-up was determined by a yes and/or no questionnaire. MAIN RESULTS: The PRED (n=85) and BUD (n=90) treatment groups were comparable at baseline (emergency department discharge) for age (mean +/- SD; 27.6+/-8.5 years and 29. 2+/-8.7 years) and prebronchodilator FEV1 (1.77+/-0.79 L and 1. 75+/-0.78 L), respectively. BUD was at least as effective as PRED in preventing a relapse to the hospital; relapse rate was 10 (11.8%) during PRED treatment and nine (10.0%) for BUD treatment (95% CI PRED-BUD, -7.5% to 11.0%). Improvements in FEV1, asthma symptoms, PEF and QoL were not significantly different between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In patients whose acute asthma has been stabilized in the emergency department, high dose BUD may be an alternate to PRED as a follow-up treatment.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations62
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respiratory JournalSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207