MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078006985 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3181a45a6b

Serotonin Receptor Antagonists for the Prevention and Treatment of Pruritus, Nausea, and Vomiting in Women Undergoing Cesarean Delivery with Intrathecal Morphine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2009· review· en· W2078006985 on OpenAlex
Ronald B. George, Terrence K. Allen, Ashraf S. Habib

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

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNausea and vomiting management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNauseaVomitingPlaceboAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialIncidence (geometry)Postoperative nausea and vomitingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review to determine the overall efficacy of serotonin (5-HT3) receptor antagonists for the prevention and treatment of pruritus, nausea, and vomiting in women receiving spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine for cesarean delivery. METHODS: Reports of randomized, controlled trials that compared prophylaxis or treatment of pruritus and/or nausea, and vomiting using one of the 5-HT3 receptor antagonists or placebo in women undergoing cesarean delivery were reviewed. The articles were scored for validity and data were extracted by the authors independently and summarized using relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Nine randomized, controlled trials were included in the systematic review. The nine trials had a total of 1152 patients enrolled; 539 received 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, 413 received placebo, and 200 received other antiemetics and were not included in the analysis. The incidence of pruritus was not reduced with 5-HT3 receptor antagonists prophylaxis compared with placebo (80.7% vs 85.8%, RR [95% CI] = 0.94 [0.81-1.09]). However, their use reduced the incidence of severe pruritus and the need for treatment of pruritus (number-needed-to-treat = 12 and 15, respectively). Their use for the treatment of established pruritus showed improved efficacy compared with placebo with a number-needed-to-treat of three. There was a significant reduction in the incidence of postoperative nausea (22.0% vs 33.6%, RR [95% CI] = 0.75[0.58-0.96]) and vomiting (7.7% vs 16.8%, RR [95% CI] = 0.49 [0.30-0.81]), and the need for postoperative rescue antiemetic treatment with the use of 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists when compared with placebo (9% vs 23%, RR [95% CI] = 0.38 [0.21-0.68]). CONCLUSIONS: Although prophylactic 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists were ineffective in reducing the incidence of pruritus, they significantly reduced the severity and the need for treatment of pruritus, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and the need for rescue antiemetic therapy in parturients who received intrathecal morphine for cesarean delivery. They were also effective for the treatment of established pruritus. Although more studies are warranted, the current data suggest that the routine prophylactic use of those drugs should be considered in this patient population.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.272 · 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