MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106038816 · doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2014.05.008

The association between blood lipid and phlegm turbidity syndrome of angina pectoris: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2014· review· en· W2106038816 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComplementary Therapies in Medicine · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsMedicinePhlegmMeta-analysisInternal medicineCochrane LibraryAnginaSubgroup analysisFunnel plotPhysical therapyTraditional medicinePublication biasTraditional Chinese medicinePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A series of case-control studies have been conducted to investigate the association between blood lipid and phlegm turbidity syndrome of angina pectoris, but produced inconsistent results. OBJECTIVE: We performed a meta-analysis to determine the association between blood lipid and phlegm turbidity syndrome of angina pectoris more precisely. METHODS: Manual screening as well as screening of the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Journal full-text database (VIP), Wanfang database (WF), ScienceDirect, Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were carried out for relevant literature. The formula was translated to calculate the pooled mean value and standard deviation value. The "Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale: Case-Control Studies" (NOS) was taken to assess the quality of the included studies. The Revman 5.2.6 software provided by "The Cochrane Collaboration" was used to analyze the collected data. The subgroup analysis was established according to the sample size proportion between the test group and the control group. Sensitivity analysis was constructed by using two different effect models. Besides, a funnel plot was created to analyze potential publication bias. RESULTS: No statistically meaningful difference existed between the test group and control group of total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) in non-Qi and yin deficiency syndrome (QYDS) and non-Yang deficiency syndrome (YDS) subgroup, whereas the two biotic indicators in the test group were higher than the non-phlegm syndrome group in other subgroups. Triglyceride (TG) in phlegm syndrome group showed superior to non-phlegm syndrome group in the rest subgroups except for the non-CCS (Cold coagulating syndrome)-non-YDS subgroup. High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) levels of the phlegm group were lower than that of the non-phlegm group in all subgroups. CONCLUSION: When comparing with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) syndromes of asthenia nature, such as YDS, QYDS, and heart qi deficiency syndrome), the levels of TG, TC, and LDL-C were higher in phlegm turbidity syndrome. However, for sthenia syndromes such as Qi stagnation syndrome (QSS), heart blood stasis syndrome (HBSS), and CCS, there was no obvious difference. Furthermore, HDL-C levels in the phlegm turbidity group were lower than those of the non-phlegm group. Nevertheless, these results should be confirmed with further studies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.271 · 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