MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079084305 · doi:10.1517/13543784.11.6.801

Anti-emetics in development

2002· review· en· W2079084305 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Loewen

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Investigational Drugs · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNausea and vomiting management
Canadian institutionsVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNauseaVomitingMedicineOpioidAnesthesiaMotion sicknessAprepitantInternal medicineAntiemeticPsychiatryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite important advances in pharmacotherapeutic options for the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting during the 1990s, a significant proportion of patients still suffer debilitating nausea and vomiting symptoms. The most problematic areas are chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting particularly delayed emesis, postoperative nausea and vomiting, opioid-induced nausea and vomiting and motion sickness. The most vigorous research into new anti-emetics has focused on the neurokinin-1 (substance P) antagonists. Clinical trials conducted to date indicate that these agents have similar efficacy to 5-HT(3) antagonists in acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, superior efficacy to available agents in delayed emesis, possibly superior efficacy against emesis in postoperative nausea and vomiting and no evidence of efficacy versus opioid or motion-induced nausea and vomiting. Other pharmacological strategies in development include agonising CB1 (cannabinoid) receptors, "broad spectrum" receptor antagonists and 5-HT(1A) receptor agonists, although clinical trials of these types of agents are not yet available. The neurokinin-1 antagonists appear to be promising agents for some nausea and vomiting states, although further clarification of their role is required.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Investigational DrugsSame topicNausea and vomiting managementFrench-language works237,207