MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107841744 · doi:10.1136/ebm.15.1.24

Corticosteroids added to antibiotic therapy aid pain resolution in adults with sore throat, particularly severe or exudative sore throat

2010· letter· en· W2107841744 on OpenAlexaff
W. M. McISAAC

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2010
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStreptococcal Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSore throatMedicinePharyngitisThroatAntibiotic therapyAntibioticsDermatologySurgeryInternal medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Hayward G, Thompson M, Heneghan C, et al. Corticosteroids for pain relief in sore throat: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2009;339:b2976.[OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] The article by Hayward and colleagues addresses one of the most common symptom presentations, and controversies, in medicine: a patient with a sore throat. In recent years, the reduction of unnecessary antibiotic use in all respiratory infections has become especially important to limit antibiotic resistance. The authors point out that “the pressure for clinicians to reduce antibiotic prescriptions for sore throats leaves a vacuum”. As a result, the use of corticosteroids as an alternative treatment is appealing. The methods used in this meta-analysis were rigorous. An extensive search for high-quality studies was undertaken. Decisions about which studies were included and excluded were transparent and clear. High-quality statistical methods for combing data were applied, and the results are presented clearly. However, as in many meta-analyses, the authors are ultimately limited by the available studies and the outcomes these studies report. In … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBMJ%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1136%252Fbmj.b2976%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F19661138%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=bmj&resid=339/aug06_2/b2976&atom=%2Febmed%2F15%2F1%2F24.atom

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0160.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.008

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicStreptococcal Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207