MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of a standardized echinacea preparation (EchinilinTM) for the treatment of the common cold: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

2004· article· en· W2074507404 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerbal Medicine Research Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityVancouver Island UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEchinacea (animal)PlaceboMedicineCommon coldRandomized controlled trialClinical trialTraditional medicineClinical endpointDosingDouble blindInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recently, echinacea has regained popularity as one of the treatments chosen most commonly by consumers with the expectation that it will reduce the severity and duration of the common cold. However, the results from a limited number of clinical trials for this application have thus far been inconclusive. This incongruity may be the result of investigators utilizing poorly standardized echinacea products, likely devoid of sufficient quantities of active constituents necessary to exert a definitive clinical effect. Therefore, a formulation containing alkamides, cichoric acid, and polysaccharides at concentrations of 0.25, 2.5, and 25 mg/mL, respectively, was prepared from freshly harvested Echinacea purpurea plants (commercially available as Echinilin, Natural Factors Nutritional Products, Inc., Vancouver, BC, Canada). The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of this highly standardized formulation in reducing the severity and duration of symptoms of a naturally acquired common cold. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 282 subjects aged 18-65 years with a history of two or more colds in the previous year, but otherwise in good health, were recruited. The subjects were randomized to receive either echinacea or placebo. They were instructed to start the echinacea or placebo at the onset of the first symptom related to a cold, consuming 10 doses the first day and four doses per day on subsequent days for 7 days. Severity of symptoms (10-point scale: 0, minimum; 9, maximum) and dosing were recorded daily. A nurse examined the subjects on the mornings of days 3 and 8 of their cold. RESULTS: A total of 128 subjects contracted a common cold (59 echinacea, 69 placebo). The total daily symptom scores were found to be 23.1% lower in the echinacea group than in placebo in those who followed all elements of the study protocol (P<0.01). Throughout the treatment period, the response rate to treatments was greater in the echinacea group. A few adverse event profiles were observed in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention with a standardized formulation of echinacea resulted in reduced symptom severity in subjects with naturally acquired upper respiratory tract infection. Further studies with larger patient populations appear to be warranted.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.351 · 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