MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114149331

Acute otitis media in children with tympanostomy tubes.

2008· article· en· W2114149331 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Schmelzle, Richard Birtwhistle, Andre K.W. Tan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTympanostomy tubeRandomized controlled trialOtotoxicityOtitisIntensive care medicineAntibioticsSequelaSurgeryChemotherapy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review evidence regarding antibiotic treatment of acute otitis media in children with tympanostomy tubes and to discuss antibiotic resistance and ototoxicity. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles. Articles providing level I evidence(randomized controlled trials) for treatment were used. Key words used in the search included otitis media(MeSH), middle ear ventilation (MeSH), tympanostomy tubes, and otorrhea. MAIN MESSAGE: Tympanostomy tube insertion is a common procedure; acute otitis media is a frequent sequela. Treatment options include systemic or topical antibiotics with or without corticosteroids. The development of bacterial resistance to antibiotics and ototoxicity related to treatment are important considerations. There have been well-conducted randomized controlled trials of topical versus systemic antibiotic agents. Combined with proper ear cleaning and tragal pumping, topical fluoroquinolone agents offer the most effective treatment. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that a topical fluoroquinolone, with or without a corticosteroid, is the treatment of choice for acute otitis media with tympanostomy tubes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207