MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233589882 · doi:10.1542/gr.45-3-28

Nebulized Magnesium Does Not Show Benefit for Acute Asthma

2021· article· en· W4233589882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAAP Grand Rounds · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicMagnesium in Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaMagnesiumIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaInternal medicineMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Source: Schuh S, , Sweeney J, , Rumantir M, , et al. Effect of nebulized magnesium vs placebo added to albuterol on hospitalization among children with refractory acute asthma treated in the emergency department: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324(20):2038-2047; doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19839[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2] Investigators from multiple institutions conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of nebulized magnesium in reducing hospitalizations in children presenting with an acute asthma exacerbation who are refractory to initial treatment. Children 2-17 years old who presented to 1 of 7 tertiary-care pediatric emergency departments in Canada with an acute asthma exacerbation were eligible for participation in the study if they remained in moderate to severe respiratory distress, defined as a Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) score ≥5, 1 hour after treatment with oral dexamethasone and 3 consecutive treatments of albuterol and ipratropium delivered by metered dose inhaler or via nebulization. At enrollment, participants were randomized to receive 3 consecutive nebulized treatments of magnesium sulfate (600 … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJAMA%26rft.volume%253D324%26rft.spage%253D2038%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1001%252Fjama.2020.19839%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2020.19839&link_type=DOI

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAP Grand RoundsSame topicMagnesium in Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207