MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cromolyn sodium for the prevention of chronic lung disease in preterm infants

2012· review· en· W4242376045 on OpenAlexaff
Geraldine Ng, Arne Ohlsson

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCromolyn SodiumCochrane LibraryBlindingPlaceboRelative riskRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePediatricsIntensive care medicineConfidence intervalAsthmaPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic lung disease (CLD) frequently occurs in preterm infants and has a multifactorial aetiology including inflammation. Cromolyn sodium is a mast cell stabiliser that inhibits neutrophil activation and neutrophil chemotaxis and may, therefore, have a role in the prevention of CLD. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of prophylactic administration of cromolyn sodium on the incidence of CLD, mortality or the combined outcome of mortality or CLD at 28 days of life in preterm infants at risk of CLD. SEARCH METHODS: The search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used to identify studies. Searches were made of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2009), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL up to and including July 2009, personal files and reference lists of identified trials. For this update the same data bases were searched on 12 April 2012. In addition, on the same date, abstracts from the Pediatric Academic Societies' Annual Meetings (2000 to 2012) were searched on the website PAS2View(TM) as was the Web of Science website using the two previously identified trials as starting points. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials involving preterm infants. Initiation of cromolyn sodium administration during the first two weeks of life. The intervention had to include administration of cromolyn sodium by nebuliser or metered dose inhaler with or without spacer device versus placebo or no intervention. Eligible studies had to include at least one of the following outcomes: overall mortality, CLD at 28 days, CLD at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA), or the combined outcome mortality or CLD at 28 days. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The standard method for The Cochrane Collaboration as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions was used. Risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous data. A fixed-effect model was used for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was examined using the I(2) statistic. MAIN RESULTS: Two eligible studies were identified with small numbers of infants enrolled. Prophylaxis with cromolyn sodium did not result in a statistically significant effect on the combined outcome of mortality or CLD at 28 days; CLD at 28 days or at 36 weeks' PMA; or CLD in survivors at 28 days or at 36 weeks' PMA. Prophylaxis with cromolyn sodium did not show a statistically significant difference in overall neonatal mortality, incidence of air leaks, necrotising enterocolitis, intraventricular haemorrhage, sepsis, and days of mechanical ventilation. No side effects were noted. Further research does not seem to be justified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence from randomised trials that cromolyn sodium has a role in the prevention of CLD. Cromolyn sodium cannot be recommended for the prevention of CLD in preterm infants.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207