Role of Probiotics in the Prevention of Recurrent Upper Respiratory Tract Infections in the Pediatric Age Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the role of probiotics in prevention of recurrent upper respiratory tract infection in children. Methodology: This quasi-experimental study was conducted at Pediatrics department of Combined Military Hospital, Quetta, Pakistan from October 2024 to April 2025 after taking parental informed consent and ethical approval from institution. A total of 64 children with recurrent upper respiratory tract infection were included, selected through non-probability consecutive sampling technique, who were divided into Group-P (probiotic) and Group-S (no probiotics) containing 32 children each. Children were followed up after three months to assess for recurrence. Analysis of data was performed through Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 22. Results: Median age was 5.00 (3.00) years. There were 45 (70.30%) male and 19 (29.70%) female patients. Median number of episodes of URTI in three months at the end of study in Group-P was 1.00 (2.00) while in Group-S it was 2.00 (3.00), (p = 0.136). Frequency of recurrence of URTI in Group-P (n = 32) at three months follow up was 9 (28.13%) while in Group-S (n = 32), it was 17 (53.13%), (p = 0.042). Conclusion: Probiotics can effectively prevent recurrent upper respiratory tract infection in children.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".