Nebulisation of dexamethasone sodium phosphate for the treatment of severe asthmatic horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids are effective in the treatment of equine asthma. A recent study reported that nebulisation of injectable dexamethasone had low systemic bioavailability in healthy horses and could represent a cost-effective therapy for equine inflammatory lung diseases. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of dexamethasone nebulisation on lung function in severe asthmatic horses. It was hypothesised that dexamethasone administered by nebulisation would be more effective than the same dose administered orally. STUDY DESIGN: Randomised blinded experimental study in severe asthmatic horses. METHODS: Twelve severe asthmatic horses in clinical exacerbation were randomly assigned to treatment with 5 mg of dexamethasone sodium phosphate by nebulisation (n = 6) or by oral administration (n = 6), once daily for 7 days. Lung function was evaluated at baseline, after four treatment days (D4) and 24 h after the last dose (D8). The presence of residual bronchospasm was assessed on D8 with N-butylscopolammonium bromide administration (0.3 mg/kg i.v.). A respiratory clinical score was performed daily. Serum cortisol concentration was measured at baseline, D4 and D8. RESULTS: O/L/s [CI: 0.34-1.65, P = 0.003]). All horses had residual bronchospasm at the end of the study. There was a group difference in the respiratory clinical score as it was significantly reduced in the oral group, from D5 to D8. Serum cortisol concentration decreased in all subjects. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Low number of horses and lack of placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the lack of improvement of lung function and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression, the results of this study do not support aerosolisation of an injectable form of dexamethasone for the treatment of severe equine asthma at the dose and with the nebuliser evaluated.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".