MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120158313 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002743

Antivirals for the common cold

2001· review· en· W2120158313 on OpenAlexaff
TO Jefferson, D. A. J. Tyrrell

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsCochrane
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCommon coldPlaceboRandomized controlled trialIntensive care medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicineImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The common cold is a ubiquitous short and usually mild illness for which preventive and treatment interventions have been under development since the mid-40s. As our understanding of the disease has increased, more experimental antivirals have been developed. This review attempts to draw together experimental evidence of the effects of these compounds. OBJECTIVES: To identify, assemble, evaluate and (if possible) synthesise the results of published and unpublished randomised controlled trials of the effects of antivirals to prevent or minimise the impact of the common cold. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched electronic databases, corresponded with researchers and handsearched the archives of the MRC's Common Cold Unit (CCU). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included original reports of randomised and quasi-randomised trials assessing the effects of antivirals on volunteers artificially infected and in individuals exposed to colds in the community. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We included 241 studies assessing the effects of Interferons, interferon-inducers and other antivirals on experimental and naturally occurring common colds, contained in 230 reports. We structured our comparisons by experimental or community setting. MAIN RESULTS: Although intranasal interferons have high preventive efficacy against experimental colds (protective efficacy 46%, 37% to 54%) and to a lesser extent against natural colds (protective efficacy 24%, 21% to 27%) and are also significantly more effective than placebo in attenuating the course of experimental colds (WMD 15.90, 13.42 to 18.38), their safety profile makes compliance with their use difficult. For example, prolonged prevention of community colds with interferons causes blood-tinged nasal discharge (OR 4.52, 3.78 to 5.41). Dipyridamole (protective efficacy against natural colds 49%, 30% to 62%), ICI 130, 685 (protective efficacy against experimental colds 58%, 35% to 74% ), Impulsin (palmitate) (protective efficacy against natural colds 44%, CI 35% to 52% ) and Pleconaril (protective efficacy against experimental colds 71%, 15% to 90% ) appear to have important antiviral properties and are well-tolerated. The evidence of effectiveness of other compounds in the treatment of experimental or natural colds is sparse. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There are no licensed effective antivirals for the common cold. Because prolonged intranasal administration causes a clinical picture which is not distinguishable from the common cold, interferons have no place in everyday use. Further assessment of the effects of dipyridamole, palmitate, ICI 130, 685, Impulsin and Pleconaril in preventing the common cold should be carried out. Given the multi-agent nature of the causes of the common cold, future research efforts should focus on non virus-specific compounds.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207