MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558872400 · doi:10.18295/squmj.2016.16.04.002

Statin-Associated Muscle Adverse Events: Update for clinicians

2016· review· en· W2558872400 on OpenAlexaff
Maha A. Al‐Mohaissen, Martha J. Ignaszewski, Jiří Fröhlich, Andrew Ignaszewski

Bibliographic record

VenueSultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStatinAdverse effectGuidelineIntensive care medicineHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsBioinformaticsInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statins are potent medications which reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Their efficacy in cardiovascular risk reduction is well established and indications for their use are expanding. While statins are generally well tolerated and safe, adverse events are relatively common, particularly statin-associated muscle adverse events (SaMAEs), which are the most frequently encountered type of adverse event. Recent guidelines and guideline updates on SaMAEs and statin intolerance have included revised definitions of SaMAEs, incorporating new evidence on their pathogenesis and management. As SaMAEs emerge as a therapeutic challenge, it is important for physicians to be aware of updates on management strategies to ensure better patient outcomes. The majority of patients who are considered statin-intolerant can nevertheless tolerate some forms of statin therapy and successfully achieve optimal LDL-C levels. This review article discusses the recent classification of SaMAEs with emphasis on pathogenesis and management strategies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSultan Qaboos University medical journalSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207