MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166911207 · doi:10.1186/s12879-015-0824-0

Effectiveness of topical corticosteroids in addition to antiviral therapy in the management of recurrent herpes labialis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2015· review· en· W2166911207 on OpenAlexaff
Nasira Arain, Sharath C.V. Paravastu, Mubashir Arain

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryPlaceboInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEFamciclovirImmunologyVirusPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recurrent herpes labialis (RHL) is one of the most common viral infections worldwide. The available treatments have limited efficacy in preventing the recurrence of ulcerative lesions and reducing the duration of illness. The objective of this review was to identify the effectiveness of topical corticosteroids in addition to antiviral therapy in the treatment of RHL infection. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy of combined therapy (topical corticosteroids with antiviral) with placebo or antiviral alone in the management of RHL was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar databases were searched. We used RevMan software to conduct the meta-analysis. A fixed-effects model was used for mild to moderate heterogeneity, whereas a random-effects model was used for significant heterogeneity. Heterogeneity among trials was established using I(2) and chi-square test for heterogeneity. RESULTS: Four studies that fulfilled the selection criteria were included in this review. The total number of participants across included studies was 1,891 (range, 29 to 1,443). The antiviral drugs used were acyclovir, famciclovir, and valacyclovir. Corticosteroids used were 1% hydrocortisone and 0.05% fluocinonide. Pooled results showed that patients receiving combined therapy had a significantly lower recurrence rate of ulcerative lesions compared to those in both the placebo group (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.66; P < .001) and the antiviral treatment alone group (OR, 0.73, 95% CI, 0.58-0.92; P = .007). The healing time was also significantly shorter in combined therapy in comparison to placebo (P < .001). However, there were no significant differences in healing time between combined therapy and antiviral alone. The adverse reactions in combined therapy were not significantly different than the placebo group (OR, 1.09; 95% C, 0.75-1.59; P = .85). CONCLUSION: Treatment with combined therapy is safe and more effective than placebo or antiviral alone for preventing the recurrence of ulcerative lesions in RHL infection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Infectious DiseasesSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207