Intrasinus Administration of Topical Budesonide to Allergic Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis Following Surgery
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Whether instillation into the maxillary sinus of topical budesonide affected the immune response and improved allergic patients with chronic rhinosinusitis that had persistence of symptoms despite appropriate surgical intervention was assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind placebo-controlled. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with allergy to house dust mites who had previously had surgery and who had persistent symptoms of disabling rhinorrhea or pressure-pain resistant to oral antibiotics and intranasal corticosteroids were recruited. During the double-blind study, patients instilled 256 microg budesonide daily or placebo through an intubation device (maxillary antrum sinusotomy tube) into one of the maxillary sinuses for 3 weeks before clinical assessment and a second biopsy. RESULTS: We found an improvement in the symptom scores in 11 of the 13 patients who received budesonide; we also found a decrease in CD-3 (P = .02) and eosinophils (P = .002), and a decrease in the density of cells expressing interleukin4 (P = .0001) and interleukin-5 messenger RNA (P = .006) after treatment. CONCLUSION: Topical budesonide delivered through a maxillary antrum sinusotomy tube can control chronic rhinosinusitis that persists after surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it