MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Acyclovir for treating varicella in otherwise healthy children and adolescents

2004· reference-entry· en· W4241565508 on OpenAlexaff
TP Klassen, EM Belseck, Natasha Wiebe, Lisa Hartling

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2004
Typereference-entry
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJadad scaleChickenpoxMedicineCochrane LibraryMEDLINERandomized controlled trialPediatricsAdverse effectInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acyclovir has the potential to shorten the course of illness which may result in reduced costs and morbidity associated with chickenpox. OBJECTIVES: 1) To examine the evidence evaluating the efficacy of acyclovir in alleviating symptoms of chickenpox and shortening the duration of illness. 2) To examine complications of chickenpox and adverse effects associated with acyclovir as reported in the relevant trials. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2003), and EMBASE (1988 to April 2003). The reference lists of all relevant articles were reviewed. The primary author of relevant studies and the pharmaceutical company that manufactures acyclovir were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials that evaluated otherwise healthy children zero to 18 years of age, with chickenpox. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently reviewed the studies for eligibility. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the relevant studies using the Jadad scale and allocation concealment. Differences were resolved by consensus. Data were extracted by one reviewer using a structured form and checked by a second.Continuous data were converted to the weighted mean difference (WMD). Weighted mean differences were combined into an overall estimate using random effects. There were too few studies to consider exploring statistical heterogeneity between studies (i.e., differences in reported effects), formally, or to assess for publication bias. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies were included. Study quality was three (n = 2) and four (n = 1) on the Jadad scale. Acyclovir was associated with a reduction in the number of days with fever (-1.1 days, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.9) and in reducing the maximum number of lesions (-76 lesions, -145 to -8). Results were less supportive with respect to the number of days to no new lesions and the number of days to the relief of itching. There were no clinically important differences between acyclovir and placebo with respect to complications associated with chickenpox or adverse effects associated with the treatment. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Acyclovir appears to be effective in reducing the number of days with fever and the maximum number of lesions among otherwise healthy children with chickenpox. The results were less convincing with respect to the number of days to no new lesions and relief of itchiness. The clinical importance of acyclovir treatment in otherwise healthy children remains controversial.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207