MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142150943 · doi:10.1001/archsurg.137.3.316

St John's Wort Supplements Endanger the Success of Organ Transplantation

2002· review· en· W2142150943 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

VenueArchives of Surgery · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNatural Compound Pharmacology Studies
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrgan transplantationTransplantationCausality (physics)SurgeryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HYPOTHESIS: St John's wort is one of the most popular herbal medicines, and health care professionals often are unaware that their patients take such supplements. St John's wort causes a decrease in cyclosporine levels, thus endangering the success of organ transplantations. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Five independent computerized literature searches were conducted to identify all reports of such interactions. Data were extracted and are summarized in narrative form. RESULTS: Eleven case reports and 2 case series were located. In most instances, causality between St John's wort and the clinical or biochemical result is well established. The mechanism of interaction between St John's wort and cyclosporine has been recently elucidated and involves both P-glycoprotein and cytochrome P 450 3A4 expression. Collectively these data leave little doubt that St John's wort interacts with cyclosporine, causing a decrease of cyclosporine blood levels and leading in several cases to transplant rejection. CONCLUSIONS: St John's wort can endanger the success of organ transplantations. Adequate information may be the best way to avoid future incidences.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.311
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