MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114404607 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201308-1549oc

The Beta Agonist Lung Injury Trial Prevention. A Randomized Controlled Trial

2014· article· en· W2114404607 on OpenAlexaff
Gavin D. Perkins, Simon Gates, Daniel Park, Fang Gao, Chris Knox, Ben Holloway, Daniel F. McAuley, James Ryan, Joseph Marzouk, Matthew W Cooke, Sarah E Lamb, David Thickett

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersJames Cook UniversityDeakin UniversityMedical Research CouncilPublic Health AgencyNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS TrustGlaxoSmithKlineIntensive Care FoundationUniversity Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS TrustWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineSalmeterolPlaceboRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectPerioperativeOdds ratioInternal medicineAnesthesiaCOPDPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Experimental studies suggest that pretreatment with β-agonists might prevent acute lung injury (ALI). OBJECTIVES: To determine if in adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, perioperative treatment with inhaled β-agonists effects the development of early ALI. METHODS: We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled trial in 12 UK centers (2008-2011). Adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy were allocated to prerandomized, sequentially numbered treatment packs containing inhaled salmeterol (100 μg twice daily) or a matching placebo. Patients, clinicians, and researchers were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was development of ALI within 72 hours of surgery. Secondary outcomes were ALI within 28 days, organ failure, adverse events, survival, and health-related quality of life. An exploratory substudy measured biomarkers of alveolar-capillary inflammation and injury. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were randomized to salmeterol and 183 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar. Treatment with salmeterol did not prevent early lung injury (32 [19.2%] of 168 vs. 27 [16.0%] of 170; odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-2.22). There was no difference in organ failure, survival, or health-related quality of life. Adverse events were less frequent in the salmeterol group (55 vs. 70; OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99), predominantly because of a lower number of pneumonia (7 vs. 17; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.96). Salmeterol reduced some biomarkers of alveolar inflammation and epithelial injury. CONCLUSION: Perioperative treatment with inhaled salmeterol was well tolerated but did not prevent ALI. Clinical trial registered with International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Register (ISRCTN47481946) and European Union database of randomized Controlled Trials (EudraCT 2007-004096-19).

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.321 · 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
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207