Safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid in bleeding paediatric trauma patients: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Trauma is the leading cause of death among children aged 1-18. Studies indicate that better control of bleeding could potentially prevent 10-20% of trauma-related deaths. The antifibrinolytic agent tranexamic acid (TxA) has shown promise in haemorrhage control in adult trauma patients. However, information on the potential benefits of TxA in children remains sparse. This review proposes to evaluate the current uses, benefits and adverse effects of TxA in the bleeding paediatric trauma population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A structured search of bibliographic databases (eg, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL) has been undertaken to retrieve randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that describe the use of TxA in paediatric trauma patients. To ensure that all relevant data were captured, the search did not contain any restrictions on language or publication time. After deduplication, citations will be screened independently by 2 authors, and selected for inclusion based on prespecified criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed independently and in duplicate. Meta-analytic methods will be employed wherever appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will not involve primary data collection, and formal ethical approval will therefore not be required. The findings of this study will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and at relevant conference meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016038023.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.042 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".