Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association between corticosteroid use and adrenal suppression is well known. One of the main benefits of using inhaled corticosteroids in asthma is the much lower incidence of adverse events than with oral corticosteroids. However, in a longitudinal surveillance study, 2500 Canadian paediatricians reported 46 new cases of adrenal suppression in children receiving oral or inhaled corticosteroids over a 2-year period.1 The children presented with adrenal crisis (n = 6, 13%) or with a wide range of non-specific symptoms plus supportive biochemical evidence. Sixteen (35%) had isolated growth failure, 13 (28%) had non-specific symptoms (one or more of fatigue, lethargy, nausea, anorexia, vomiting, abdominal pain or myalgia) and 6 (18%) had both growth failure and one or more non-specific symptoms. Three (7%) had Cushing syndrome. Most patients (37, 80%) had asthma, all of whom had received inhaled corticosteroids. Many children received high but nevertheless commonly used doses. Sixteen of the 37 had also received oral corticosteroids, usually but not always in short courses. The authors did not attempt to elucidate the most important denominator, the number of children prescribed inhaled corticosteroids over the study period. Thus, although they report a population incidence of adrenal suppression of 0.35/10 000 children aged 0–18 years, we have no idea what proportion of children prescribed inhaled corticosteroids develops adrenal suppression. Nevertheless, this study shows the importance of being circumspect about prescribing high dose inhaled corticosteroids.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".