Results of a clinical study of the combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride in patients with sore throat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sore throat is one of the most frequent complaints with which patients seek medical help from an otorhinolaryngologist, therapist and pediatrician. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined topical drug with flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride in patients with sore throat caused by upper respiratory tract infections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective multicenter open randomized comparative study in parallel groups included 266 adult patients with an established diagnosis of acute pharyngitis or acute tonsillitis aged 18 to 60 years with the main complaint of sore throat caused by viral infections of the upper respiratory tract. The patients included in the study were randomized into two groups of 133 participants each: the 1st group included patients who received the combined agent flurbiprofen 8.75 mg and cetylpyridinium chloride 1.00 mg in the form of tablets for resorption, the 2nd group included patients who received cetylpyridinium chloride 1.2 mg in the form of medicinal lozenges. The effectiveness was evaluated on several scales (RADT, STPIS, TPA, STPR) reflecting subjective and objective indicators of the dynamics of the disease. RESULTS: The studied combination proved to be more effective than the monocomponent agent and was characterized by a more pronounced decrease in sore throat within 2 hours after taking the drug and a decrease in pharyngeal hyperemia. CONCLUSION: According to the results of the study, the use of a drug based on a combination of flurbiprofen and cetylpyridinium chloride was accompanied by a rapid and pronounced decrease in sore throat and pharyngeal hyperemia in patients with upper respiratory tract infections.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".