MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104276638 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keh390

Calcium channel blockers for primary Raynaud's phenomenon: a meta-analysis

2004· review· en· W2104276638 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

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsArthritis Research Centre of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNifedipinePlaceboRandomizationInternal medicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisInclusion and exclusion criteriaCalcium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To determine the efficacy of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) for primary Raynaud's phenomenon (RP). Primary outcomes were frequency and severity of RP attacks. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using primary data sources: Medline, Current Contents and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of >2 days' duration with <35% dropouts. Eighteen of 31 trials were eligible for inclusion [13 nifedipine vs placebo; five other CCBs vs placebo (n = 361)]. The main reasons for trial exclusion were: subset data (primary RP) not provided (n = 10); data published more than once (n = 1); lack of control group (n = 1); and lack of randomization (n = 1). Data were abstracted independently and a weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for the outcomes. RESULTS: The WMD (95% confidence interval) of all CCBs vs placebo for reduction in the frequency of attacks (n = 17) over 1 week was -5.00 (-9.02, -0.99) (P = 0.01) or -2.80 (-3.90, -1.70) when heterogeneity was considered, and -6.05 (-11.19,-0.19) (P = 0.04) for nifedipine alone (n = 10). The WMD of all CCBs vs placebo (n = 8) for reduction in severity of attacks (assessed with a 10-cm visual analogue scale) was -1.39 (-2.20, -0.58) (P = 0.0007) and -1.81 (-3.08, -0.54) (P = 0.005) for nifedipine alone (n = 5). CONCLUSIONS: Several small RCTs of CCBs for primary RP have been conducted and have yielded clinical improvement in the frequency and severity of ischaemic attacks. Most trials were crossover trials in which order effect was not studied; this may have introduced bias. The effect size may have been small because of low dosing in studies. The efficacy of CCBs for reducing severity and frequency of ischaemic attacks in primary RP is small (average of 2.8 to 5.0 fewer attacks per week and a 33% reduction in severity).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.215 · 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