MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3174752970 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048338

Management of asthma in childhood: study protocol of a systematic evidence update by the Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank

2021· article· en· W3174752970 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander G. Mathioudakis, Michael Miligkos, Cristina Boccabella, Gioulinta S. Alimani, Adnan Čustović, A. Deschildre, Francine M. Ducharme, Ömer Kalaycı, Clare Murray, Wanda Phipatanakul, David Price, Aziz Sheikh, Ioana Agache, Leonard B. Bacharier, Apostolos Beloukas, Andrew Bentley, Matteo Bonini, José A. Castro‐Rodríguez, Giuseppe De Carlo, Timothy Craig, Zuzana Diamant, Wojciech Feleszko, Tim Felton, James E. Gern, Jonathan Grigg, Gunilla Hedlin, Elham Hossny, Despo Ierodiakonou, Tuomas Jartti, Alan Kaplan, Robert F. Lemanske, Peter N. Le Souëf, Mika J. Mäkelä, Georgios A. Mathioudakis, Paolo Maria Matricardi, Marina Mitrogiorgou, Mário Morais‐Almeida, Karthik Nagaraju, Effie Papageorgiou, Helena Pité, Petr Pohunek, Graham Roberts, Ioanna Tsiligianni, Steve Turner, Susanne J. H. Vijverberg, Tonya Winders, Gary Wong, Paraskevi Xepapadaki, Heather J. Zar, Nikolaos G. Papadopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de Montréal
FundersManchester Biomedical Research CentreRespiratory Effectiveness GroupNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchSanofiAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaSystematic reviewObservational studyIntensive care medicineMEDLINEClinical trialPsychological interventionPharmacotherapyProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialCochrane LibraryPediatricsMeta-analysisAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Clinical recommendations for childhood asthma are often based on data extrapolated from studies conducted in adults, despite significant differences in mechanisms and response to treatments. The Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank aspires to develop recommendations based on the best available evidence from studies in children. An overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on paediatric asthma maintenance management and an SR of treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, requiring an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission will be conducted. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Standard methodology recommended by Cochrane will be followed. Maintenance pharmacotherapy of childhood asthma will be evaluated in an overview of SRs published after 2005 and including clinical trials or real-life studies. For evaluating pharmacotherapy of acute asthma attacks leading to an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission, we opted to conduct de novo synthesis in the absence of adequate up-to-date published SRs. For the SR of acute asthma pharmacotherapy, we will consider eligible SRs, clinical trials or real-life studies without time restrictions. Our evidence updates will be based on broad searches of Pubmed/Medline and the Cochrane Library. We will use A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, V.2, Cochrane risk of bias 2 and REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, controlled clinical trials and real-life studies, respectively.Next, we will further assess interventions for acute severe asthma attacks with positive clinical results in meta-analyses. We will include both controlled clinical trials and observational studies and will assess their quality using the previously mentioned tools. We will employ random effect models for conducting meta-analyses, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess certainty in the body of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for SRs. Our findings will be published in peer reviewed journals and will inform clinical recommendations being developed by the PeARL Think Tank. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBERS: CRD42020132990, CRD42020171624.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.018
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.009

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicAsthma and respiratory diseases→French-language works237,207→