MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522586926 · doi:10.1111/acem.13107

Prioritizing Systemic Corticosteroid Treatments to Mitigate Relapse in Adults With Acute Asthma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐analysis

2016· review· en· W2522586926 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian H. Rowe, Scott W. Kirkland, Ben Vandermeer, Sandy Campbell, Amanda S. Newton, Francine M. Ducharme, Cristina Villa‐Roel

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreCapital District Health AuthorityUniversité de MontréalAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaPlaceboConfidence intervalMeta-analysisOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineCredible intervalRelative riskCorticosteroidEmergency departmentPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: While systemic corticosteroids (SCS) are widely used to prevent relapse in adults with acute asthma discharged from the emergency department, the most effective route of administration is unclear. The objective of this review was to examine the effectiveness of SCS in adults and to identify the most effective route of SCS to preventing relapse. METHODS: A search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) or oral (PO) short-course or long-course corticosteroids to prevent relapse in adults with acute asthma. Two independent reviewers judged study relevance, inclusion, and risk of bias. Pooled statistics were calculated as risk ratios (RR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and credibility intervals (CrI) using a random-effects model. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed for indirect comparisons of SCS to placebo. Probability of best (PB) analysis was reported for comparisons between the routes of administration. RESULTS: Thirteen studies of moderate quality were included. Four studies compared SCS to placebo, in which SCS significantly reduced relapse (RR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.25 to 0.74). In the network meta-analysis, a significant reduction in relapse within 10 days of discharge was found in adults receiving IM (OR = 0.21; 95% CrI = 0.05 to 0.73) and PO long-course (OR = 0.31; 95% CrI = 0.09 to 0.95) corticosteroids. Relapse rates between PO short-course corticosteroids and placebo were not statistically significantly different (OR = 0.37; 95% CrI = 0.04 to 3.38). PB analysis favored IM corticosteroids (62%) followed by PO short-course (20.3%) and PO long-course (14.1%) corticosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: The network analysis identified IM corticosteroids and PO long-course corticosteroids as the most effective strategies to prevent relapse among adults with acute asthma, compared to PO short-course corticosteroids. The lack of significant findings with PO short-course corticosteroids is likely due to the paucity of research. Further comparative studies are required to determine the safety and effectiveness of briefer PO SCS treatment options in adults.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.037
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Emergency MedicineSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207