MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Xylitol for the prevention of acute otitis media episodes in children aged 1–5 years: a randomised controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4387970835 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Navindra Persaud, Amir Azarpazhooh, Charles Keown‐Stoneman, Catherine S. Birken, Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, Jonathon L. Maguire, Muhammad Mamdani, Christopher Allen, Dalah Mason, Christine Kowal, Mateenah Jaleel, Farnaz Bazeghi, Kevin E. Thorpe, Andreas Laupacis, Patricia C. Parkin

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsXylitolMedicinePlaceboOtitisRandomized controlled trialPediatricsAcute otitis mediaUpper respiratory tract infectionPsychological interventionRespiratory tract infectionsInternal medicineSurgeryRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the regular use of xylitol, compared with sorbitol, to prevent acute otitis media (AOM), upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and dental caries. DESIGN: Blinded randomised controlled trial with a 6-month study period. SETTING: Enrolment took place at 11 primary care practices in Ontario, Canada. PATIENTS: Children aged 1-5 years who did not use xylitol or sorbitol at enrolment. INTERVENTIONS: Children were randomly assigned to use a placebo syrup with sorbitol or xylitol syrup two times per day for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the number of clinician-diagnosed AOM episodes over 6 months. Secondary outcomes were caregiver-reported URTIs and dental caries. RESULTS: Among the 250 randomised children, the mean (SD) age was 38±14 months and there were 124 girls (50%). There were three clinician-diagnosed AOM episodes in the 125 placebo group participants and six in the 125 xylitol group participants (OR 2.04; 95% CI 0.43, 12.92; p=0.50). There was no difference in number of caregiver-reported URTI episodes (rate ratio (RR) 0.88; 95% CI 0.70, 1.11) between the placebo (4.2 per participant over 6 months; 95% CI 3.6, 5.0) and xylitol (3.7; 95% CI 3.2, 4.4) groups. Dental caries were reported for four participants in the placebo group and two in the xylitol group (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.04, 3.05; p=0.42). In a post-hoc analysis of URTIs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate among the 59 participants receiving placebo was 2.3 per participant over 6 months (95% CI 1.8, 3.0) and for the 55 receiving xylitol, 1.3 over 6 months (95% CI 0.92, 1.82; RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.36, 0.87). The most common adverse event was diarrhoea (28% with placebo; 34% with xylitol). CONCLUSIONS: Regular use of xylitol did not prevent AOM, URTIs or dental caries in a trial with limited statistical power. A post-hoc analysis indicated that URTIs were less common with xylitol exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic, but this finding could be spurious. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03055091.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in ChildhoodSame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207