MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003046120 · doi:10.1111/coa.12344

Positive pressure therapy for <scp>M</scp>eniere's syndrome/disease with a <scp>M</scp>eniett device: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

2014· review· en· W2003046120 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Otolaryngology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineClinical trialMeta-analysisConfidence intervalIncidence (geometry)SurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Incidence rates of Meniere's syndrome/disease vary considerably from 157 per 100 000 in the United Kingdom to 15 per 100 000 in the United States. A wide range of treatments are used for the treatment of the condition with no consensus on the most effective intervention. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of the Meniett device in reducing the frequency and severity of vertigo in Meniere's syndrome/disease. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials were searched. The date of the last search was 13th May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified that compared the efficacy of the Meniett device versus a placebo device in patients with Meniere's 'disease' as defined by the AAOO criterion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. The outcome data were dichotomous for all the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: The four RCTs compared 123 patients with the Meniett device against 114 patients with the placebo device from four RCT's over a follow-up period of 2 weeks to 4 months. There was a significant overall 61% reduction in the frequency of vertigo in both groups (mean no vertigo days per month of 8-3). However, this reduction was not significantly different between the two groups in any study or on meta-analysis [mean difference in vertigo-free days between Meniett and placebo device of 0.77 days over a 1-month period (95% CI - 0.82, 1.83) P = 0.45]. There were also no substantive data to support a greater reduction in the severity of the vertigo or any other outcome with the Meniett device compared with the placebo device. AUTHORS CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found to justify the use of the Meniett device in Meniere's syndrome/disease.

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.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.354
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.354
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0350.009
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.317 · 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