MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391994927 · doi:10.3390/curroncol31020082

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study of Salivary Substitute with Enzymatic System for Xerostomia in Patients Irradiated in Head and Neck Region

2024· article· en· W4391994927 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Letícia Pacheco Porangaba, Flávio De Melo Garcia, Ana Paula Alvarenga Antonio Rabelo, Amanda Puche Andrade, Fábio Abreu Alves, Antônio Cássio Assis Pellizzon, Graziella Chagas Jaguar

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineSalivaPlaceboQuality of life (healthcare)Head and neckRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapyClinical trialInternal medicineSurgeryGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to compare whether the use of a salivary substitute including an enzymatic system clinically reduces the intensity of xerostomia, as well as exploring the impact that this has on the quality of life, in patients who had received radiotherapy in the head and neck (HNC) region. Forty patients who had completed radiotherapy treatment within 6 months to 1 year previously were allocated into an Enzymatic Spray group (n = 21) or a Placebo arm (n = 19). It should be noted that two patients in the Placebo arm declined to participate during phase 2 of the study. All patients were randomized and used both products three times a day for 30 days. For analysis, xerostomia grade, unstimulated (UWS) and stimulated (SWS) salivary flow rate, and quality of life through the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire validated in Portuguese (UW-QoL) were assessed in two phases: Phase 1 (before the use of the products) and Phase 2 (after 30 days of using the products). All clinical data were collected from medical records. Analyzing the salivary substitute with the enzymatic system, an improvement in xerostomia complaints was observed 30 days after using the product; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Regarding quality of life, no significant differences were observed in relation to the UW-QoL and saliva domain between the groups in the two phases of the study (p > 0.05). The salivary substitute with the enzymatic system may be effective in reducing radio-induced xerostomia symptoms; however, further research is necessary to evaluate the efficacy of this salivary substitute on oral health.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized triallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
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 score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207