Review: thickened feeds or metoclopramide may reduce symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux in healthy infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Craig WR, Hanlon-Dearman A, Sinclair C, et al . Metoclopramide, thickened feedings, and positioning for gastro-oesophageal reflux in children under two years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(4):CD003502. Q What is the effectiveness of thickened feeds, positioning, and metoclopramide for treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux (GER) in developmentally normal infants 1–24 months of age? ### ![Graphic][1]</img>Data sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials ( Cochrane Library , Issue 1, 2003), Medline (1966 to January 2003), EMBASE/Excerpta Medica (1985 to January 2003), and reference lists of retrieved reviews. ### ![Graphic][2]</img>Study selection and assessment: randomised controlled trials that compared thickened feeds with unthickened feeds; metoclopramide with no intervention or placebo; or various positions in developmentally normal children 1–24 months of age with GER (diagnosed by signs or symptoms or pH monitoring). 3 independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of individual studies using the Jadad scale. ### ![Graphic][3]</img>Outcomes: signs and symptoms of GER (regurgitation, respiratory symptoms, and weight gain), reflux index (percentage of total time oesophageal pH <4), number of reflux episodes, number of reflux episodes lasting >5 minutes per unit time, adverse effects such as coughing (thickened feeds) and fussiness, drowsiness, and extrapyramidal … [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [2]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [3]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".