Magnesium Use in Asthma Pharmacotherapy: A Pediatric Emergency Research Canada Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of intravenous magnesium in Canadian pediatric emergency departments (EDs) in children requiring hospitalization for acute asthma and association of administration of frequent albuterol/ipratropium and timely corticosteroids with hospitalization. METHODS: Retrospective medical record review at 6 EDs of otherwise healthy children 2 to 17 years of age with acute asthma. Data were extracted on history, disease severity, and timing of ED stabilization treatments with inhaled albuterol, ipratropium, corticosteroids, and magnesium. Primary outcome was the proportion of hospitalized children given magnesium in the ED. Secondary outcome was the ED use of "intensive therapy" in hospitalized children, defined as 3 albuterol inhalations with ipratropium and corticosteroids within 1 hour of triage. RESULTS: A total of 19 (12.3%) of 154 hospitalized children received magnesium (95% confidence interval 7.1, 17.5) versus 2 of 962 discharged patients. Children given magnesium were more likely to have been previously admitted to ICU (odds ratio [OR] 11.2), hospitalized within the past year (OR 3.8), received corticosteroids before arrival (OR 4.0), presented with severe exacerbation (OR 6.1), and to have been treated at 1 particular center (OR 14.9). Forty-two (53%) of 90 hospitalized children were not given "intensive therapy." Children receiving "intensive therapy" were more likely to present with severe disease to EDs by using asthma guidelines (ORs 8.9, 3.0). Differences in the frequencies of all stabilization treatments were significant across centers. CONCLUSIONS: Magnesium is used infrequently in Canadian pediatric EDs in acute asthma requiring hospitalization. Many of these children also do not receive frequent albuterol and ipratropium, or early corticosteroids. Significant variability in the use of these interventions was detected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".