Nedocromil sodium in the treatment of exercise-induced asthma: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise-induced asthma (or bronchoconstriction) afflicts millions of people worldwide. While generally self-limiting, it can hinder performance and reduce activity levels, thus it is an important condition to diagnose and treat. The objective of this review was to assess the prophylactic effect of a single dose of nedocromil sodium on exercise-induced asthma. The Cochrane Airways Group trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Current Contents, reference lists of relevant articles, review articles and textbooks were searched for randomized trials comparing a single dose of nedocromil to placebo to prevent exercise-induced asthma in people >6 yrs of age. Authors and the drug manufacturer were contacted for additional trials. Trial quality assessments and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. Authors were contacted when possible. Twenty trials were included. All were rated as having good methodological quality. Nedocromil inhibited bronchoconstriction in all age groups. The pooled weighted mean difference for the maximum percentage fall in forced expiratory volume in one second was 15.6%, (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 13.2-18.1) and for the peak expiratory flow was 15.0% (95% CI: 8.3-21.6). These differences are both statistically and clinically significant. After nedocromil the time to recover normal lung function was <10 min compared to >30 min with placebo. Nedocromil had a greater effect on people with a fall in lung function of >30% from baseline. There were no significant adverse effects reported with this short-term use. In conclusion, Nedocromil taken before exercise appears to reduce the severity and duration of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. This effect appears to be more pronounced as severity increases.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".