MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555732238 · doi:10.1111/coa.12792

Role of honey after tonsillectomy: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials

2016· review· en· W2555732238 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Otolaryngology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTonsillectomyRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryCINAHLMEDLINEAdverse effectSurgeryInternal medicinePsychological interventionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Honey reduced post-tonsillectomy pain, but its effects on awakening at night, inflammation and healing of the tonsillar fossa were controversial. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the effect of oral honey on pain, consumption of painkillers, awakening at night, healing of tonsillar fossa and adverse effects in children after tonsillectomy. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Collaboration Library databases was performed without any restriction of publication year. The end date of search was 30 June 2016. The search was supplemented by search from Google, hand search of cross-references of selected articles and reviews, and contacting the authors of different studies. The inclusion criteria were RCTs comparing the effect of honey with control on different outcomes, in children after tonsillectomy. RESULTS: Our search generated 64 studies, and eight RCTs met our inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of RCTs was poor. Compared to control, honey significantly decreased postoperative pain from day 1 to day 7 (P = 0.05 to <0.0001); consumption of painkillers from days 1 to 5 (P = 0.03 to 0.003) and on day 10 (P = 0.002); and number of awakening at night due to pain on days 2 and 4 after tonsillectomy (P = 0.0001, 0.004). The healing of tonsillar fossa was significantly greater with honey compared to control on days 3-4 (P = 0.02) and days ≥9 (P = 0.01) after tonsillectomy. The adverse effects were not significantly different between honey and control groups. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) of the evidence for different outcomes varied from 'low' to 'very low'. CONCLUSIONS: Honey improved pain, requirement of painkillers and awakening at night due to pain in children after tonsillectomy. There was little improvement in healing of tonsillar fossa. The GRADE of the evidence varied from 'low' to 'very low'. A good-quality, placebo-controlled RCT of different doses and durations of administration of honey is required to evaluate its clear efficacy and safety in children after tonsillectomy.

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.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0980.021
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.342 · 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