MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Homocysteine and Stroke Prevention: Have the Trials Settled the Issue?

2006· article· en· W2042068829 on OpenAlexaff
J. David Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomocysteineMedicineVitamin B12Stroke (engine)Internal medicineVascular diseaseClinical trialCardiologyB vitamins

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent publicity surrounding disappointing results of clinical trials of homocysteine lowering has led to the claim that 'homocysteine is dead'. However, there is strong evidence that elevated plasma total homocysteine is an important independent risk factor, and the highly plausible biological rationale is the following: total homocysteine increases coagulation, impairs endothelial function, increases oxidative stress and low density lipoprotein oxidation, and treatment with vitamins reverses these effects and halts progression of carotid plaque. Some studies have shown clinical benefit of vitamin therapy in coronary angioplasty and peripheral vascular disease. It has recently become apparent that vitamin B12 absorption is impaired in the elderly, and that metabolic B12 deficiency is much commoner than would be appreciated by statistical definitions of 'normal' serum B12; higher doses of B12 and perhaps other therapies such as betaine and thiols may be needed to achieve adequate reductions of total homocysteine. It remains likely that effective lowering of total homocysteine will reduce stroke and other vascular events.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.160
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.301
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1600.301
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.027
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0300.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207