MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053802025 · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2012.08.006

Rationale and design of the Investigation of the Management of Pericarditis (IMPI) trial: A 2 × 2 factorial randomized double-blind multicenter trial of adjunctive prednisolone and Mycobacterium w immunotherapy in tuberculous pericarditis

2012· article· en· W2053802025 on OpenAlexafffund
Bongani M. Mayosi, Mpiko Ntsekhe, Jackie Bosch, Janice Pogue, Freedom Gumedze, Motasim Badri, Hyejung Jung, Shaheen Pandie, Marek Smieja, Lehana Thabane, Veronica Francis, Kandithal M. Thomas, Baby Thomas, A A Awotedu, Nombulelo Magula, D.P. Naidoo, Albertino Damasceno, Alfred Chitsa Banda, Arthur Mutyaba, Basil Brown, Patrick Ntuli, Phindile Mntla, Lucas Ntyintyane, Rohan Ramjee, Pravin Manga, Bruce Kirenga, Charles Mondo, James B. Russell, Jacob M. Tsitsi, Ferande Peters, Mohammed R. Essop, Ayub Felix Barasa, Muhammad Sani Mijinyawa, Mahmoud U. Sani, Taiwo Olunuga, Okechukwu S. Ogah, A Adebiyi, Akinyemi Aje, Victor Ansa, Dike Ojji, Solomon Danbauchi, James Hakim, Jonathan Matenga, Salim Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Heart Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPericarditis and Cardiac Tamponade
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineTuberculous pericarditisPericarditisSurgeryPlaceboPericardial effusionPericardiocentesisInternal medicineCardiac tamponadeRandomized controlled trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Heart JournalSame topicPericarditis and Cardiac TamponadeFrench-language works237,207