Ondansetron and probiotics in the management of pediatric acute gastroenteritis in developed countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute gastroenteritis (AGE) is a common and impactful disease, typically managed with supportive care. There is considerable interest in the role of adjunctive therapies, particularly ondansetron and probiotics in improving AGE outcomes. The purpose of this review is to present the latest evidence regarding the use of these agents in children with AGE in developed countries. RECENT FINDINGS: Single-dose oral ondansetron is effective and safe in reducing hospital admissions and the use of intravenous rehydration in children with AGE in emergency-department-based trials. Ondansetron use has increased significantly; however, 'real-world' studies of effectiveness have documented less impressive clinical impacts. Similarly, probiotic consumption is growing rapidly. Although several strains appear to reduce the duration of diarrhea in hospitalized children, current data are insufficient to support the routine use of probiotics in outpatient pediatric AGE. SUMMARY: Ondansetron and probiotics may improve patient outcomes in pediatric AGE. Appropriate strategies are needed to optimally integrate oral ondansetron into clinical practice to maximize its potential benefits. Although probiotics remain a promising option, there are challenges in generalizing the data available to patients presenting for outpatient care. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to definitively guide the clinical use of probiotics in outpatients in developed countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".