153: Ondansetron for Pediatric Concussion: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most patients suffering from concussion present persistent symptoms at one week post injury. A systematic review showed a paucity of studies for short term outcomes following concussion. Among potential treatments, Ondansetron has shown promising results based on clinical experience and a single retrospective study. The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the clinical efficacy of one dose of oral Ondansetron to decrease post concussion symptoms at one week following concussion in children aged between eight and 17 years old. This was a randomized, double blinded, controlled trial performed among children aged between eight and 17 years old who sustained a concussion in the previous 24 hours. Participants visiting the emergency department were randomized to receive one dose of either ondansetron or placebo. The primary outcome of interest was an increase from pre-concussion baseline of at least three symptoms from the Post Concussion Symptom Inventory (PCSI) one week following trauma. Secondary outcomes included time to full recovery, mean PCSI score, and outcomes at one month following head trauma. The primary analysis compared the proportion of participants with persistence of symptoms at one week in both groups. This was a pilot study aiming to evaluate the feasibility of the study. A total of 16 children provided informed consent and were randomized to the study medication. They all provided data for the measurement of the primary outcome at one week and one month. The proportion of children with persistent post concussion symptoms was higher in the placebo group but this did not reach statistical significance at one week (difference: 13%; 95% CI −40% to 69%) and one month (difference: 37%; 95% CI −15% to 90%). This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of ondansetron for concussion in children. The administration of one dose of ondansetron in the first 24 hours following concussion showed a trend toward a lower proportion of post-concussion symptoms at one week and one month following intervention. Based on these results, a larger, more powerful study is necessary.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".