Altitude Sickness in Climbers and Efficacy of NSAIDs Trial (ASCENT): Randomized, Controlled Trial of Ibuprofen Versus Placebo for Prevention of Altitude Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of ibuprofen versus placebo in preventing acute mountain sickness (AMS) and high altitude headache (HAH). METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-four healthy Western trekkers were recruited on the Everest approach at 4280 m or 4358 m and randomly assigned to receive either 600 mg of ibuprofen or placebo 3 times daily before and during ascent to 4928 m. One hundred eighty-three of 294 participants completed the trial. Of the participants who did not complete the trial, 62 were lost to follow-up and another 49 broke trial protocol. In an intent-to-treat analysis (232 participants), ibuprofen was found to be more effective than placebo in reducing the incidence of AMS (24.4% vs 40.4%; P = .01) and the incidence of HAH (42.3% vs 60.5%; P < .01). Ibuprofen was also superior to placebo in reducing the severity of HAH (4.9% vs 14.7%; P = .01). The end point of oxygen saturation was also higher in the ibuprofen group (80.8 % vs 82.4%; P = .035). For the 183 participants who completed the trial and conformed to the protocol, the incidence of AMS between placebo and treatment groups was not significant (32.9% vs 22.7%; P = .129 for AMS incidence, 9.6% vs 8.2%; P = .74 for AMS severity, 54.8% vs 42.7%; P = .11 for HAH incidence, and 8.2% vs 3.6%; P = .18 for HAH severity). CONCLUSIONS: Ibuprofen was found to be effective in preventing AMS in the intent-to-treat analysis group but not in those who completed the trial. This loss of significance in the subjects who completed the trial may be explained by persons in the placebo group having a higher burden of illness and associated decreased compliance with the protocol. An important limitation of this study may be the possibility that ibuprofen can mask headache, which is a compulsory criterion for the diagnosis of AMS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".