MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120739418 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.070261

Fish-oil supplementation in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a meta-analysis

2008· review· en· W2120739418 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David J.A. Jenkins, Andrea R. Josse, Joseph Beyene, Paul Dorian, M L Burr, Remi Labelle, Cyril W.C. Kendall, S.C. Cunnane

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRelative riskMeta-analysisVentricular fibrillationRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineVentricular tachycardiaConfidence intervalMyocardial infarctionFish oilCardiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A recent Cochrane meta-analysis did not confirm the benefits of fish and fish oil in the secondary prevention of cardiac death and myocardial infarction. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of fish-oil supplementation on ventricular fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia to determine the overall effect and to assess whether heterogeneity exists between trials. METHODS: We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL) from inception to May 2007. We included randomized controlled trials of fish-oil supplementation on ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The primary outcome was implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge. We calculated relative risk [RR] for outcomes at 1-year follow-up for each study. We used the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects methods when there was significant heterogeneity between trials and the Mantel-Hanzel fixed-effects method when heterogeneity was negligible. RESULTS: We identified 3 trials of 1-2 years' duration. These trials included a total of 573 patients who received fish oil and 575 patients who received a control. Meta-analysis of data collected at 1 year showed no overall effect of fish oil on the relative risk of implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge. There was significant heterogeneity between trials. The second largest study showed a significant benefit of fish oil (relative risk [RR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.98). The smallest showed an adverse tendency at 1 year (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.92-1.65) and significantly worse outcome at 2 years among patients with ventricular tachycardia at study entry (log rank p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: These data indicate that there is heterogeneity in the response of patients to fish-oil supplementation. Caution should be used when prescribing fish-oil supplementation for patients with ventricular tachycardia.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.051
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations69
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207