MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385295206 · doi:10.1002/lary.30907

Pediatric Inferior Turbinate Hypertrophy: Diagnosis and Management. A <scp>YO‐IFOS</scp> Consensus Statement

2023· review· en· W4385295206 on OpenAlexaff
Antonino Maniaci, Christian Calvo‐Henríquez, Giovanni Cammaroto, Carlos García‐Magán, Vanesa García-Paz, Giannicola Iannella, Ignacio Jiménez‐Huerta, Ignazio La Mantia, Jérôme R. Lechien, Samuel Leong, David Lobo, Juan M. Solano, Ron B. Mitchell, Andrea Otero‐Alonso, Thomas Radulesco, François Simon, Natasha Teissier, Salvatore Cocuzza, Alberto Maria Saibene

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystematic reviewDelphi methodEvidence-based medicineVotingIntensive care medicineRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEFamily medicinePathologyAlternative medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric inferior turbinate hypertrophy (PedTH) is a frequent and often overlooked cause or associated cause of nasal breathing difficulties. This clinical consensus statement (CCS) aims to provide a diagnosis and management framework covering the lack of specific guidelines for this condition and addressing the existing controversies. METHODS: A clinical consensus statement (CCS) was developed by a panel of 20 contributors from 7 different European and North American countries using the modified Delphi method. The aim of the CCS was to offer a multidisciplinary reference framework for the management of PedTH on the basis of shared clinical experience and analysis of the strongest evidence currently available. RESULTS: A systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria was performed. From the initial 96 items identified, 7 articles were selected based on higher-evidence items such as randomized-controlled trials, guidelines, and systematic reviews. A 34-statement survey was developed, and after three rounds of voting, 2 items reached strong consensus, 17 reached consensus or near consensus, and 15 had no consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Until further prospective data are available, our CCS should provide a useful reference for PedTH management. PedTH should be considered a nasal obstructive disease not necessarily related to an adult condition but frequently associated with other nasal or craniofacial disorders. Diagnosis requires clinical examination and endoscopy, whereas rhinomanometry, nasal cytology, and questionnaires have little clinical role. Treatment choice should consider the specific indications and features of the available options, with a preference for less invasive procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Laryngoscope, 134:1437-1444, 2024.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LaryngoscopeSame topicNasal Surgery and Airway StudiesFrench-language works237,207