MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cromolyn sodium: A potential therapy for uremic pruritus?

2006· article· en· W2147987169 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mitchell H. Rosner

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCromolyn SodiumHemodialysisDialysisClinical trialPlaceboGabapentinRefractory (planetary science)AnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicineAsthmaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uremic pruritus occurs in up to 50% of patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. The pathogenesis of this disabling condition is unknown but likely involves multiple pathways involving the peripheral and central nervous system as well as local chemical and inflammatory mediators. Therapy has involved modification of the dialysis procedure, topical medications such as emollients, physical treatments such as ultraviolet light, and several oral medications such as antihistamines, activated charcoal, and gabapentin. Unfortunately, most of these therapies have not been subjected to rigorous clinical trials and clinical success has been variable. Two patients with disabling uremic pruritus refractory to multiple interventions are reported, who showed significant improvement in pruritus severity as assessed by a visual analog scale when they were treated with the mast cell stabilizer cromolyn sodium. Cessation of cromolyn resulted in return of pruritus, which improved with rechallenge with the medication. Cromolyn sodium may offer an alternative therapy for patients with refractory uremic pruritus, and should be subjected to a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis InternationalSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207