The role of magnesium sulfate in the acute and chronic management of asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute asthma is common and severe exacerbations may result in hospitalization, need for endotracheal intubation and, rarely, death. Standard emergency care includes systemic corticosteroids and bronchodilators, but additional treatments may be required in severe cases. We summarize the substantial evidence regarding the role of MgSO4 in acute asthma and comments on the potential benefit in chronic asthma. RECENT FINDINGS: Inhaled and intravenous MgSO4 agents are used in the treatment of acute asthma, but only the intravenous formulation is effective. In severe asthma exacerbations, a single bolus dose of intravenous MgSO4 reduces admissions and improves pulmonary functions. Inhaled MgSO4 is more effective than placebo as a bronchodilator, but performs no better than salbutamol and there is no apparent synergy when the two are combined. Whereas intravenous MgSO4 treatments appear to be effective, long-term 'replacement' therapy with magnesium does not appear to affect chronic asthma. SUMMARY: Evidence suggests that intravenous MgSO4 is beneficial in acute asthma, while the evidence for inhaled MgSO4 is less convincing. Moreover, the role of replacement therapy with oral magnesium remains to be clarified. The use of intravenous MgSO4 remains uncommon, with emergency physicians appropriately restricting its use to patients with severe exacerbations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".