Evaluation of Lactobacillus Coryniformis K8 Consumption by Health Care Workers Exposed to COVID-19 (LactoCor2 Project): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lactobacillus coryniformis K8 CECT5711 has immune-modulating properties, enhances the immune response to viral antigens leading to the production of specific antibodies, and has anti-inflammatory activity, which may help to prevent uncontrolled inflammatory processes leading to respiratory and other organ failures. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of the consumption of a probiotic strain on the incidence and severity of COVID-19 in health personnel who carry out their professional work among patients with infection or suspected infection by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: colony former units/day), and the control group will receive a daily placebo capsule consisting of maltodextrin. A sample size of 314 volunteers was calculated. Volunteers must meet the following inclusion criteria: older than 20 years and active health personnel caring for patients with COVID-19, including all professionals such as medical doctors, nurses, and caretakers at the 2 referral hospitals that treat patients with COVID-19. The main outcome of the clinical trial will be the incidence of symptomatic infection by SARS-CoV-2 in personnel who care for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. RESULTS: The study had to be extended to the 2 referral hospitals that treat patients with COVID-19 in the province of Granada (Andalusia, Spain); Hospital San Cecilio and Hospital Virgen de las Nieves. A total of 255 individuals met the inclusion criteria and were randomly assigned to one of the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this randomized controlled trial will provide valuable information regarding the administration of L coryniformis K8 against COVID-19, including whether there are fewer infectious processes due to this virus or, in case of occurrence, whether the disease is milder in participants taking the probiotic strain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04366180; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04366180. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/37857.
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 | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.007 |
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".