MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322051673 · doi:10.1177/0333102413519512

Nutraceuticals in the prophylaxis of pediatric migraine: Evidence-based review and recommendations

2014· review· en· W2322051673 on OpenAlexaff
Serena L. Orr, Sunita Venkateswaran

Bibliographic record

VenueCephalalgia · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGinkgo biloba and Cashew Applications
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutraceuticalMedicineMigraineObservational studyRandomized controlled trialPediatricsInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The literature on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is expanding. One of the most common conditions for which CAM is studied in the pediatric population is migraine. Nutraceuticals are a form of CAM that is being used for pediatric migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: A literature search was carried out in order to identify both observational studies and randomized controlled trials on the use of nutraceuticals for the prophylaxis of pediatric migraine. Adult studies on included nutraceuticals were also reviewed. REVIEW: Thirty studies were reviewed on six different nutraceuticals: butterbur, riboflavin, ginkgolide B, magnesium, coenzyme Q10 and polyunsaturated fatty acids. CONCLUSION: Overall, the quality of the evidence for the use of nutraceuticals in pediatric migraine prophylaxis is poor. Further research needs to be done in order to study the efficacy of nutraceuticals for the prophylaxis of pediatric migraine.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 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

Citations58
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCephalalgiaSame topicGinkgo biloba and Cashew ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207