MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090073903 · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2020-000674

Study of Natural products Adverse Reactions (SONAR) in children seen in mental health clinics: a cross-sectional study

2020· article· en· W3090073903 on OpenAlex
Emma Sparks, Liliane Zorzela, Candace Necyk, Baljit Khamba, Liana Urichuk, Joanne Barnes, Sunita Vohra

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Paediatrics Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsMedical prescriptionMedicineAdverse effectMental healthCross-sectional studyPopulationPsychiatryPediatricsInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Paediatric mental health patients frequently use natural health products (NHP) in addition to prescription medications, but very little is known about adverse events and possible NHP-drug interactions. OBJECTIVE: To determine: (1) the prevalence of paediatric mental health patients taking prescription medications only, NHP only, both NHP and prescription medications concurrently or neither; (2) which prescription medications and NHP are most commonly used in paediatric mental health populations and (3) adverse events experienced in the last 30 days (serious and non-serious). DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveillance study. SETTING: Paediatric mental health clinics. POPULATION/INTERVENTION: On their first clinic visit, paediatric mental health patients were provided with a form inquiring about prescription drug use, NHP use and any undesirable event experienced in the last month. RESULTS: Of the 536 patients included in this study, 23% (n=120) reported taking only prescription medication(s), 21% (n=109) reported only NHP use, 21% (n=112) reported using both NHP and prescription drugs concurrently, and 36% (n=191) reported using neither. Overall, there were 23 adverse events reported; this represents 6.3%, 2.8%, 10.8% and 0.6% of each population, respectively. The majority of patients who experienced an adverse event reported taking more than one NHP or prescription drug. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of the paediatric mental health patients in this study were taking NHPs alone or in addition to prescription medications. Active surveillance identified multiple adverse events associated with NHP and prescription drug use; none were serious. Healthcare professionals were encouraged to initiate conversations regarding NHP use.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.346 · 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