MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294566541 · doi:10.1542/pir.28-6-235

Complementary, Holistic, and Integrative Medicine: Butterbur

2007· review· en· W2294566541 on OpenAlexaffabout
Candace Sadler, Leah Vanderjagt, Sunita Vohra

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatrics in Review · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegrative medicineMedicineHolistic healthAlternative medicineTraditional medicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Candace Sadler* 2. Leah Vanderjagt, MLIS* 3. Sunita Vohra, MD, MSc* 1. *Complementary and Alternative Research and Education (CARE) Program, Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. On behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics Provisional Section on Complementary, Holistic, and Integrative Medicine Petasites hybridus , a perennial shrub that grows in Europe, Asia, and North America, is commonly referred to as butterbur because the leaves of the plant have been used to wrap butter during warm seasons. (1)(2). Historically, butterbur has been used for a wide range of conditions, such as “urinary tract spasms,” back pain, asthma, and topical wound healing. (3)(4) Generally, bitter-tasting compounds extracted from the root of the butterbur plant, known as petasins, are the active ingredient. (4) Butterbur is a member of the Asteraceae/Compositae family and has been used medicinally for more than 2,000 years. (2) Recent research has evaluated butterbur to prevent asthma attacks, allergic rhinitis, and migraine headaches due to its anti-inflammatory and antispasmodic effects. (3)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13) Evidence for the use of butterbur in children is promising, although preliminary. Data are based primarily on open-label, cohort-controlled trials in adults and children and randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) in adults. ### Asthma A prospective nonrandomized, open trial evaluated the effects of butterbur treatment in adults (n=64) and children (n=16) ages 6 to 17 years who had mild-to-moderate asthma. (14) Over an 8-week period, adults received 50 g of butterbur extract three times daily; children received 50 to 150 mg per day, depending on age. All patients were permitted to continue all other asthma medications. By the end of the study, the number and duration of asthma attacks had decreased by 48% and 75% respectively; FEV1 improved by 70.6% and peak flow by 83.9%. After 16 weeks of follow-up, 42.9% of …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatrics in ReviewSame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207