MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974206186 · doi:10.1159/000343287

Best Current Therapy for Patients with Malignant Pleural Effusion

2012· letter· en· W1974206186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yossef Aelony

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiration · 2012
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalignant pleural effusionPleural effusionCurrent (fluid)Intensive care medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

slurry or thoracoscopic talc poudrage pleurodesis. Furthermore, it remains unclear whether spontaneous pleurodesis with TPC prolongs life. In survivors to 14 weeks, the mean time to pleurodesis was 54 days. One coauthor’s earlier study revealed that those with TPC who had spontaneous pleurodesis lived over 3 times as long as those who did not have pleurodesis [2] . If pleurodesis by itself prolongs life, why not use more rapid pleurodesis techniques, such as talc slurry or thoracoscopic talc poudrage in the best candidates for longer survival? The report of Sabur et al. [1] complements a recent RCT by Davies et al. [3] (TIME2) from 7 centers in the UK, which found that talc slurry pleurodesis was ‘not inferior’ to TPC in controlling dyspnea 42 days after randomization [3] . The median length of the initial hospitalization was shorter in the TPC group ( ! 1 day vs. 4 days) (shorter hospitalizations – a median of 3 days – have been reported with thoracoscopic talc poudrage) [4] . There was no significant difference in qol. The study by Davies et al. [3] was not powered to compare survival in the 2 groups and results from the 2 procedures were discordant for complications versus the need for subsequent procedures. These mixed results suggest that the choice of procedure may depend on the specific circumstances of each patient and local capabilities. The randomization process led to half A vexing problem for patients and physicians today is malignant pleural effusion. These patients’ generally short survivals may be managed with hospice care or chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Palliative options for dyspnea include repeated thoracenteses, placement of an indwelling plastic catheter for drainage at home, and pleurodesis. Little controlled data is available comparing these treatments. Fortunately, in this issue of Respiration, Sabur et al. [1] report on quality of life (qol) in 4 Canadian centers after insertion of a tunneled pleural catheter (TPC) left in place either for life or until ‘spontaneous’ pleurodesis occurred. This study indicates that patients surviving 14 weeks after TPC placement have improved mean qol, dyspnea scores, and patient satisfaction compared to baseline. Median dyspnea scores, which might have proved complementary, were omitted. However, 45% of patients were deceased at 14 weeks’ follow-up. No attempt was made to determine the qol and dyspnea from family members of the 45% who died between 2 and 14 weeks, roughly half the patients. So the qol/dyspnea results are based on the half of the patients with relatively long survival. Other information of interest would be a full accounting of lifetime medical events – qol, dyspnea, and otherwise – following TPC, in comparison with control groups of talc Published online: November 21, 2012

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespirationSame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207