Update on nonantibiotic therapies for acute gastroenteritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to provide an update of nonantibiotic therapies for acute gastroenteritis (AGE), focusing on antiemetics and probiotics. RECENT FINDINGS: The mainstay of therapy for nonsevere AGE remains oral rehydration therapy (ORT). Recent randomized controlled trials and metaanalyses have further strengthened the evidence-base supporting single-dose ondansetron administration in emergency departments to facilitate ORT based on evidence that it safely reduces intravenous fluid administration and hospitalization rates. Intravenous ondansetron administration and multiple-dose use should be avoided. A bimodal release ondansetron formulation was shown to improve outcomes in adolescents and adults with AGE in one study, but further evidence is required to support use. Recent large trials evaluating probiotic administration demonstrated a lack of benefit and guidelines that recommend their use should reevaluate their positions in light of this evidence. Furthermore, caution should be exercised when use is considered in high-risk populations and settings. SUMMARY: The benefits, dosing/route, and target populations most likely to benefit from ondansetron have been further clarified. Optimization of the real-life effectiveness of this therapy will require implementation strategies. Recent high-quality evidence showing a lack of efficacy and potential harm associated with probiotic use suggests that routine use for AGE should be discouraged.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".