Aspirin, 1000 mg, reduced moderate to severe pain in acute migraine headache
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipton RB, Goldstein J, Baggish JS, et al . Aspirin is efficacious for the treatment of acute migraine. Headache 2005;45:283–92.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q Is a single dose of aspirin, 1000 mg, effective for treatment of acute migraine with moderate to severe pain intensity? ### ![Graphic][5] Design: Randomised, placebo controlled trial. ### ![Graphic][6] Allocation: unclear concealment. ### ![Graphic][7] Blinding: blinded (patients). ### ![Graphic][8] Follow up period: several time points up to 24 hours. ### ![Graphic][9] Setting: USA. ### ![Graphic][10] Patients: 485 patients who were 18–50 years of age (mean age 37 y, 79% women, 77% white); had experienced migraine headache, with or without aura, according to International Headache Society (IHS) criteria; had at least moderate pain; and had ⩾1 but ⩽6 migraines per month during the previous year. Exclusion criteria included vomiting ⩾20% of the time during an attack; initiation of preventive medication in the past 3 months or use of alkaloids to treat migraine; use of anticoagulant, gout, or arthritis medications; and previous non-responsiveness … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DHeadache%26rft.stitle%253DHeadache%26rft.aulast%253DLipton%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%2BB.%26rft.volume%253D45%26rft.issue%253D4%26rft.spage%253D283%26rft.epage%253D292%26rft.atitle%253DAspirin%2Bis%2Befficacious%2Bfor%2Bthe%2Btreatment%2Bof%2Bacute%2Bmigraine.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1111%252Fj.1526-4610.2005.05065.x%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15836564%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.05065.x&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=15836564&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F8%2F4%2F107.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000228065000005&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [9]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [10]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".