MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210519337 · doi:10.1002/ebch.1925

Glucocorticoids for the treatment of anaphylaxis

2013· review· en· W4210519337 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Jui Lin Choo, F. Estelle R. Simons, Aziz Sheikh

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review Journal · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnaphylaxisMedicineAntihistaminePlaceboCINAHLMEDLINERandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisAllergyIntensive care medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicineAnesthesiaImmunologyPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Anaphylaxis is a serious hypersensitivity reaction that is rapid in onset and may result in death. Anaphylaxis guidelines recommend glucocorticoids for the treatment of people experiencing anaphylaxis. Objectives We sought to assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticoid treatment during episodes of anaphylaxis. Search methods In our previous version we searched the literature until September 2009. In this version we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) ( The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1956 to September 2011), EMBASE (Ovid) (1982 to September 2011), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (to September 2011). We also searched the UK National Research Register and websites listing ongoing trials, and contacted international experts in anaphylaxis in an attempt to locate unpublished material. Selection criteria We planned to include randomized and quasi‐randomized controlled trials comparing glucocorticoids with any control (either placebo, adrenaline (epinephrine), an antihistamine, or any combination of these). Data collection and analysis Two authors independently assessed articles for inclusion. Main results We found no studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Authors' conclusions We are, based on this review, unable to make any recommendations for the use of glucocorticoids in the treatment of anaphylaxis. Glucocorticoids for the treatment of anaphylaxis Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may result in death. It is commonly triggered by a food, insect sting, medication, or natural rubber latex. The reaction typically occurs without warning and can be a frightening experience both for those at risk and their families and friends. Steroids (glucocorticoids) are often recommended for use in the management of people experiencing anaphylaxis. However, the evidence base in support of the use of steroids is unclear. We therefore conducted a systematic review of the literature, searching key databases for high quality published and unpublished material on the use of steroids for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. In addition, we contacted experts in this health area and the relevant pharmaceutical companies. We were unable to find any randomized controlled trials on this subject through our searches. We conclude that there is no evidence from high quality studies for the use of steroids in the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Therefore, we can neither support nor refute the use of these drugs for this purpose.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Child Health A Cochrane Review JournalSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207