MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093295958 · doi:10.1586/1744666x.2.2.209

Desloratadine for allergic rhinitis

2006· article· en· W2093295958 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Wilken, Adrian Daly, Cynthia Sullivan, Harold Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Clinical Immunology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesloratadineMedicineAntihistamineNasal congestionPopulationAnticholinergicDermatologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaPharmacologySurgeryNose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) affect up to 40% of the population (depending on geographical area), and are associated with significant morbidity, socioeconomic costs and reductions in quality of life. Antihistamines are a first-line therapy, with newer nonsedating agents having superseded sedating first-generation drugs. Desloratadine is a nonsedating, nonimpairing antihistamine that is effective in relieving nasal and non-nasal symptoms of SAR and PAR, including nasal congestion. Desloratadine has a 24-h duration of action, enabling once-daily dosing and providing relief of morning symptoms. Clinical trials have demonstrated that it has no performance impairment, cardiovascular effects or clinically relevant interactions with other tested medications. This article reviews the use of desloratadine in the treatment of SAR and PAR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Clinical ImmunologySame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207