MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1954869321 · doi:10.1002/ebch.1984

Cochrane in context: Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth and dose–response effects on growth

2014· letter· en· W1954869321 on OpenAlexaff
Linjie Zhang, Aniela I. Pruteanu, Sílvio O. M. Prietsch, Bhupendrasinh F Chauhan, Francine M. Ducharme

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review Journal · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInhaled corticosteroidsAsthmaSystematic reviewContext (archaeology)Asthma managementPediatricsInhalationCochrane collaborationIntensive care medicineCochrane LibraryMEDLINEMeta-analysisAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cochrane Review: Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth Zhang L, Prietsch SOM, Ducharme FM. Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD009471. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009471.pub2 Cochrane Review: Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose‐response effects on growth Pruteanu AI, Chauhan BF, Zhang L, Prietsch SOM, Ducharme FM. Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose–response effects on growth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD009878. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009878.pub2 This companion piece to the reviews, “Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth” and “Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose–response effects on growth,” contains the following pieces: The abstract of each review A commentary from one or more of the review authors, explaining why the review team felt both reviews were important to produce A review of clinical practice guidelines Some other recently published references on this topic

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.007
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review JournalSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207