MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246695791 · doi:10.1161/str.43.suppl_1.a2316

Abstract 2316: Benefits Of Clinical Trial Participation For Risk Factor Control: Experience From The SPS3 Study

2012· article· en· W2246695791 on OpenAlexaff
Helena Lau, Carole L. White, Christopher S. Coffey, José R. Romero, Aleksandra Pikula, Viken L. Babikian, Carlos S. Kase, Oscar Benavente

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyPopulationRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionClinical trialStroke (engine)Risk factorGerontologyDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To assess for unplanned effects of trial participation as measured by changes in smoking, alcohol use, and exercise. Background: Trial effect is a non-specific element of trial participation that has been difficult to quantify. Recent trials are beginning to measure this with promising results. The SPS3 study tests the effects of antiplatelet therapy and intensive blood pressure control on stroke recurrence and cognitive decline. The protocol does not mandate interventions for modifying lifestyle behaviors but local study investigators provide guidance for these changes at their discretion. This provides an opportunity to evaluate a “trial effect”, beyond the study interventions. Design/Methods: SPS3 subjects who completed at least one 3-month visit were included (n=2935). Definitions used by CDC for risk factors were applied to SPS3. Hypothesis tests were performed to determine differences between SPS3 group at baseline and general population (CDC, n=210000). Kaplan-Meier plots were used to determine time from baseline to behavior changes. Log-rank tests were performed to determine influence of age, gender, education, and ethnicity in risk factor outcomes. Results: At baseline, smoking status was comparable between SPS3 and CDC groups (19.9%, 20.6% respectively); alcohol use was significantly lower (27.9%, 52% respectively); and exercise was comparable (50.8%, 48.8% respectively). Of the 583 smokers at baseline; 323 (55%) stopped while 152 (47%) restarted over the mean follow-up of 36 months. Of the 820 regular alcohol users at baseline, 536 (65%) stopped while 278 (52%) restarted again. Of the 1444 who did not exercise at least 3 times per week at baseline, 1209 (84%) started while 855 (71%) stopped again. There were no significant differences in these three health behaviors by age, gender, education, or race. A marginally significant effect by age was observed related to alcohol. Subjects ≤64 yr old at baseline were more likely to stop regular alcohol use than those >64 (p=0.054). Conclusion: Independent of the study intervention, SPS3 participants significantly modified their health behaviors. Our findings suggest that it is important to address trial effect and its impact on the outcomes.

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.127
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207