Efficacy of a Leukotriene Receptor Antagonist in the Treatment of Perennial Allergic Rhinitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to investigate the efficacy of leukotriene receptor antagonists in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. The study was designed as a randomized, 14-day treatment to compare the efficacy of zafirlukast, loratadine, and the combination of loratadine and pseudoephedrine in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis. Rhinitis symptom scores, acoustic rhinometry, and rhinomanometry were used to evaluate the efficacy. The results showed that after a 14-day treatment period, patients in all treatment groups had a lower mean score for the symptoms of rhinorrhea, nasal itching, and nasal obstruction (p < .05). Patients who took zafirlukast did not report a significant decrease in sneezing score (p = .1456), but the decrease in nasal obstruction score was more pronounced than in those who took loratadine or loratadine- pseudoephedrine (p = .014). However, the results of acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry did not have a significant difference among the three groups (p > .05). The study concluded that zafirlukast seemed to have a better effect on relieving the symptom of nasal obstruction in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis, but the actual mechanism needs further investigation.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".