MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078263303 · doi:10.1002/hep.20698

A randomized, controlled crossover trial of ondansetron in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and fatigue†

2005· article· en· W2078263303 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeremy J. Theal, Mohssen Nassiri Toosi, Larisa M. Girlan, Ronald J. Heslegrave, Pierre–Michel Huet, Kelly W. Burak, Mark G. Swain, George Tomlinson, E. Jenny Heathcote

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalUniversity Health NetworkHôpital Saint-LucUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Liver Foundation
KeywordsOndansetronPlaceboMedicineCrossover studyRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaInternal medicineNausea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fatigue is common in primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC). Altered central serotonergic neurotransmission may be involved in its pathogenesis. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial evaluated the efficacy of ondansetron, a selective 5-HT3 receptor subtype antagonist, for treating fatigue in PBC. A crossover design was chosen, allowing subjects to serve as their own controls-appropriate to evaluate fatigue, a subjective symptom. Sixty patients with clinically stable PBC, a Fatigue Severity Score (FSS) > 4, and no other identifiable cause for fatigue were enrolled. Subjects were randomized to receive ondansetron (4 mg) or placebo orally 3 times daily for 4 weeks (period 1). Subjects then crossed over, after a minimum 1-week washout period, for a further 4 weeks of ondansetron or placebo (period 2). Fatigue was measured at the beginning and end of each period by using the FSS and Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS). Six patients withdrew; the remaining 54 subjects had a mean baseline FSS of 5.55 (+/-0.1). Response to study medication in period 1 versus period 2 was not uniform; thus, it was necessary to analyze the trial periods separately. In period 1, there was no significant additional fatigue reduction on ondansetron over placebo. During period 2, FSS and FIS decreased significantly on ondansetron versus placebo (P = .001). However, period 2 results were invalidated because drug side effects unblinded subjects (constipation affected 63.0% of patients taking ondansetron, versus 13.3% on placebo). In conclusion, ondansetron administration did not confer clinically significant fatigue reduction when compared with placebo in our study population.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations72
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207