MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159662544 · doi:10.1002/ebch.1842

Introduction to Clinical Answers: Croup

2012· article· en· W2159662544 on OpenAlexaffabout
Candice Bjornson, David W. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOtolaryngology and Infectious Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCroupMedicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Croup, a common respiratory illness of childhood, is the focus of this issue's 'Clinical Answers'.Croup (laryngotracheobronchitis) affects up to 3% of children under the age of six years every year (1) and is also occasionally seen in older children and rarely in adolescents and adults (2).Croup is most commonly caused by parainfluenza type 1 and 3 viral infection, but other viruses have been implicated including influenza A and B, respiratory syncytial virus, adenovirus, coronavirus, rhinovirus and human metapneumovirus, among others (1, 3-7).The infection leads to inflammation and oedema of the upper airway mucosa and narrowing of the subglottic region, causing varying degrees of airway obstruction.Classic symptoms include the sudden onset of barky cough and hoarse voice, and in more severe cases, stridor and chest wall indrawing.The majority of children have mild, shortlived symptoms (6).However, a small proportion of children have moderate to severe symptoms which can result in hospital admission (8-10), and in the most severe cases, intubation (11)(12)(13)(14).Croup is a clinical diagnosis, based upon careful history and physical examination in a child presenting with typical symptoms.In general, the diagnosis is straightforward, but rare alternate causes of stridor and respiratory distress should be considered and excluded (15).The most likely alternate diagnoses include bacterial tracheitis and epiglottitis, especially in a child who has atypical symptoms, does not respond as anticipated to treatment or who shows deterioration (15,16).There are several practical management aspects in croup that are not evidence based but are clinically sensible.In any child with possible airway obstruction, it is important to take care to minimize distressing procedures and to maintain a calm and reassuring environment (15).Although there is no published evidence that oxygen should be administered, it is routinely given to children who are showing signs of respiratory distress.Blow-by oxygen can be administered by the parent via tubing held a few centimetres from the child's nose and mouth.Children should not be treated

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1610.076

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review JournalSame topicOtolaryngology and Infectious DiseasesFrench-language works237,207