Topical Ciprofloxacin/Dexamethasone Otic Suspension is Superior to Ofloxacin Otic Solution in the Treatment of Granulation Tissue in Children with Acute Otitis Media With Otorrhea Through Tympanostomy Tubes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Comparison of topical ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone otic suspension (CIP/DEX) to ofloxacin otic solution (OFL) for treatment of granulation tissue in children with AOMT. STUDY DESIGN: 599 children aged >/=6 months to 12 years with AOMT of up to 3 weeks' duration were enrolled. Patients received either CIP/DEX 4 drops twice daily for 7 days or OFL 5 drops twice daily for 10 days. Granulation tissue severity was graded at clinic visits on days 1, 3, 11, and 18. RESULTS: Granulation tissue was present in 90 of 599 AOMT patients (15.0%) at baseline. CIP/DEX treatment was superior to OFL for reduction of granulation tissue at the day 11 visit (81.3% compared with 56.1%, P = 0.0067) and the day 18 visit (91.7% compared with 73.2%, P = 0.0223). Both topical otic preparations are safe and well tolerated in pediatric patients. CONCLUSION: CIP/DEX was superior to OFL in the treatment of granulation tissue in children with AOMT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".