MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331833734 · doi:10.1136/ebmed-2014-110133

Cotrimoxazole is associated with sudden death in older patients receiving inhibitors of renin–angiotensin system

2015· letter· en· W2331833734 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raya Kheirbek, Nawar Shara

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPotassium and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyHeart failurePopulationUrinary systemUrologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on : Fralick M, Macdonald EM, Gomes T, et al. Canadian Drug Safety and Effectiveness Research Network. Co-trimoxazole and sudden death in patients receiving inhibitors of renin-angiotensin system: population based study. BMJ 2014;349:g6196[OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2]. ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to older patients with hypertension, heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) and may increase serum potassium (K) levels. Cotrimoxazole, a common antibiotic used to treat urinary tract infections, may also raise serum K levels, especially in patients also taking other drugs that raise serum K … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBMJ%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1136%252Fbmj.g6196%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F25359996%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=bmj&resid=349/oct28_8/g6196&atom=%2Febmed%2F20%2F3%2F113.atom

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial · Commentary

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicPotassium and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207