MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and safety of clarithromycin versus erythromycin for the treatment of pertussis: a prospective, randomized, single blind trial

2001· article· en· W2038571957 on OpenAlex
Marc Lebel, Sunil Mehra

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineLakeridge Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClarithromycinErythromycinMedicineRandomized controlled trialBordetella pertussisAdverse effectInternal medicineClinical trialAntibioticsProspective cohort studyPediatricsMicrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pertussis is still a prevalent public health problem, and antibiotic therapy may decrease disease severity and limit communicability. Erythromycin is the recommended antibiotic for treatment and prophylaxis of pertussis; however, side effects of erythromycin limit its usefulness in some patients. Clarithromycin, a newer macrolide, has good in vitro activity against Bordetella pertussis and a better side effect profile. GOALS OF THE STUDY: To compare the microbiologic and clinical efficacy and the clinical safety of a 7-day course of clarithromycin vs. a 14-day course of erythromycin in children with pertussis. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, single blind (investigator), parallel group trial. METHODS: Children from 1 month to 16 years of age presenting with a clinically defined pertussis syndrome were eligible for the study. After obtaining informed written consent, we randomized patients to receive either clarithromycin (7.5 mg/kg/dose twice a day for 7 days) or erythromycin (13.3 mg/kg/dose three times a day for 14 days). Nasopharyngeal cultures for B. pertussis were performed at enrollment and after end of treatment. Clinical assessments were performed at enrollment, at end of treatment and at a 1-month follow-up visit. Adverse event data were collected throughout the study. RESULTS: The clarithromycin (n = 76) and erythromycin (n = 77) groups were well-matched for age and previous pertussis immunization. Microbiologic eradication and clinical cure rates were 100% (31 of 31) for clarithromycin and 96% (22 of 23) for erythromycin. The clarithromycin group had significantly fewer adverse events [45% (34 of 76) for clarithromycin vs. 62% (48 of 77) for erythromycin; P = 0.035], and compliance with the medication regimen was significantly higher in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: A 7-day regimen of clarithromycin and a 14-day course of erythromycin were equally effective for treatment of pertussis. Clarithromycin was better tolerated than conventional erythromycin therapy.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.251 · 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