MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1551911976 · doi:10.1155/2015/402481

Atorvastatin Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation Reduces Serum High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein Levels

2015· review· en· W1551911976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fangcheng Su, Xidong Li, Shaoxia Sun, Mingyu Shi, Feng-hua Xue, Shi-Chao Teng, Li Jiang, Jing Zhu, Hong-yue Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtorvastatinAlgorithmInternal medicineMedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated whether serum hs-CRP levels predict the efficacy of atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with atorvastatin. Bibliographic databases were exhaustively searched for studies relevant to the research topic. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) criteria, combined with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS), were applied for study quality assessment. Our meta-analysis identified seven cohort studies (2006~2013), providing information on the change in serum hs-CRP levels in AF patients receiving atorvastatin therapy. After atorvastatin treatment, hs-CRP level in AF patients decreased significantly (SMD = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.58-1.47, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis by country and hs-CRP detection methods suggested a negative relationship between atorvastatin treatment and hs-CRP levels among Chinese AF patients (SMD = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.00-1.69, P < 0.001) and by using ELISA method (SMD = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.51-1.71, P < 0.001), but not among Turkish population and using INA method (all P > 0.05). Egger's test showed no publication bias (P = 0.450). hs-CRP was clearly lowered in AF patients treated with atorvastatin, which may be helpful in the choice of statin agents for AF treatment. However, longer follow-ups are necessary to assess the clinical value of lowering hs-CRP in the clinical setting of AF treatment outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.541
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.013 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207