MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Breath-Holding Spells in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review of the Current Evidence

2018· review· en· W2900931027 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

VenueCurrent Pediatric Reviews · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCryingPediatricsObservational studyIntensive care medicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breath-holding spells are common, frightening, but fortunately benign events. Familiarity with this condition is important so that an accurate diagnosis can be made. OBJECTIVE: To familiarize physicians with the clinical manifestations, diagnosis, evaluation, and management of children with breath-holding spells. METHODS: A PubMed search was completed in Clinical Queries using the key term "breath-holding spells". The search strategy included meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, observational studies, and reviews. Only papers published in the English literature were included in this review. The information retrieved from the above search was used in the compilation of the present article. RESULTS: Breath-holding spells affect 0.1 to 4.6% of otherwise healthy young children. The onset is usually between 6 and 18 months of age. The etiopathogenesis is likely multifactorial and includes autonomic nervous system dysregulation, vagally-mediated cardiac inhibition, delayed myelination of the brain stem, and iron deficiency anemia. Breath-holding spells may be cyanotic or pallid. The former are usually precipitated by anger or frustration while the latter are more often precipitated by pain or fear. In the cyanotic type, the child usually emits a short, loud cry, which leads to a sudden involuntary holding of the breath in forced expiration. The child becomes cyanosed, rigid or limp, followed by a transient loss of consciousness, and a long-awaited inspiration and resolution of the spell. In the pallid type, crying may be minimal or "silent". The apneic period in the pallid type is briefer than that in the cyanotic type prior to the loss of consciousness and posture. The episode in the pallid type then proceeds in the same manner as a cyanotic spell except that the child in the pallid type develops pallor rather than cyanosis. In both types, the entire episode lasts approximately 10 to 60 seconds. The spells usually disappear spontaneously by 5 years of age. CONCLUSION: Although breath-holding spells are benign, they can be quite distressing to the parents. Confident reassurance and frank explanation are the cornerstones of treatment. Underlying cause, if present, should be treated. Interventions beyond iron supplementation may be considered for children with severe and frequent breath-holding spells which have a strong impact on the lifestyle of both the child and family.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.299 · 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