Treatment of infantile spasms in resource limited settings: Arandomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To compare the outcome of ACTH with oral prednisolone for treatment of infantile spasms. Methodology: This is a randomized controlled trial conducted at department of paediatric neurology, The Children Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan after ethical approval from January 1st 2014 to December 31st 2017. (Four years). Seventy patients with infantile spasms were randomized in two equal groups of 35 patients in each group. Patients in group A received prednisolone and in group B received ACTH. The two groups were compared for the spasms free period. Statistical significant determined by chi-square test (p< 0.05 was taken as significant). Non-probability purposive sampling was used and an inclusion criterion was children up to age of one year with infantile spasms. Exclusion criteria include children who had been previously treated with steroids or ACTH. Seventy patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were enrolled through neurology department of Children Hospital, Lahore. History, informed consent was taken by parents and was divided in two groups by lottery method. All the information was collected on a specially designed proforma. Results: In group A, 29 (83%) patients were spasms free, while in group B, 31 (88%) patients were spasms free. Conclusion: Significant number of patients with IS were spasms free with prednisolone which is very cost effective drug as compared to ACTH. Developing counties should considered this treatment option as a first line therapy. Key words: Epilepsy, ACTH, Prednisolone, Infantile spasms, Hypsarthymia.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".