MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253058710 · doi:10.1093/pch/12.9.803a

Re: Croup in the paediatric emergency department

2007· article· en· W4253058710 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOtolaryngology and Infectious Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCroupEmergency departmentMedical emergencyMedicineEmergency medicinePediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors respond; We would like to thank Dr Ludemann for his letter, which identifies several points in our article that need clarification. First, solid evidence demonstrates that oral administration of corticosteroids is at least equivalent to both parenteral and inhaled corticosteroids (1–4). Second, with regard to why, in Figure 1, intramuscular or intravenous dexamethasone is not mentioned, and why the suggested observation time after treatment with nebulized adrenaline is 2 h (as opposed to the text which states 2 h to 3 h), it is because this figure is taken directly from the Alberta Medical Association Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Croup (5). This guideline is a consensus document, and consequently not all options are listed; rather only those therapeutic options which the Guideline Committee thought optimal are recommended. The Guideline Committee recommended that children with vomiting and severe respiratory distress receive inhaled rather than intramuscular or intravenous corticosteroids because adrenaline and budesonide can be nebulized together resulting in no further agitation to the child, whereas obtaining intravenous access does result in agitation. Agitation can cause already distressed children to precipitously deteriorate. Intramuscular dexamethasone also does not yield peak blood levels until almost 60 min after administration, far longer than nebulized administration (6). The basis for choosing a 2 h observation period, as opposed to 3 h following administration of adrenaline, is that, although there are no comparative studies assessing the safety of a 2 h versus 3 h observation, the Committee thought there was sufficient published evidence to justify a 2 h cut-off (7,8).

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)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0230.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.018

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicOtolaryngology and Infectious DiseasesFrench-language works237,207