Nasal-spraying Bacillus spore probiotics for pneumonia in children with respiratory syncytial virus and bacterial co-infections: a randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our study addresses the pressing need for safe and effective treatments for pneumonia in young children caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and bacterial co-infections. This issue is particularly urgent given the absence of targeted RSV therapies and the growing threat of antibiotic resistance associated with managing bacterial co-infections. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05929599) at Vietnam National Children's Hospital to evaluate nasal-spraying Bacillus spore probiotics (LiveSpo Navax containing B. subtilis ANA4 and B. clausii ANA39 at ≥1 billion CFU/mL) in children aged 1-24 months with pneumonia due to RSV and bacterial co-infection. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard care plus either LiveSpo Navax or physiological saline solution, using a simple sealed-number draw at enrollment. Primary outcomes were the median duration required to resolve common pneumonia symptoms, duration of oxygen therapy, and total treatment days. RESULTS: A total of 120 children are enrolled (60 per group). In the final analysis, 50 participants in the Control group and 51 in the Navax group are included. The trial is completed with no serious adverse events or treatment-related side effects in either group. Navax treatment shortens the duration of eight symptoms associated with RSV pneumonia by one day, oxygen therapy by two days, and overall treatment by one day. CONCLUSIONS: The nasal-spraying Bacillus spore approach presents a safe, effective, and fast treatment for young children with pneumonia due to RSV and bacterial co-infections, making it especially a promising strategy for resource-limited settings.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".