MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774129088 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000009115

Incidence of malignant hyperthermia in patients undergoing general anesthesia

2017· article· en· W2774129088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Junyong In, Eun Jin Ahn, Dong Kyu Lee, Hyun Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIon channel regulation and function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)MEDLINEMeta-analysisObservational studySystematic reviewPublication biasCohort studySubgroup analysisStudy heterogeneityFamily medicineStrengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Malignant hyperthermia (MH) continues to be of potential concern for clinicians whenever inhalational anesthetic agents or succinylcholine are used, because MH is a potentially fatal metabolic disorder. METHODS: A systematic and comprehensive search will be performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar, for studies published up to November 2017. Peer-reviewed prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies or reports issued by government organizations reporting the incidence or prevalence of MH will be eligible for inclusion. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the modified risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity of estimates across studies as well as publication bias will be assessed. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. All statistical analyses will be conducted using the Stata SE version 15.0. RESULTS: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this systematic review and meta-analysis will be the first to evaluate existing research on the incidence of MH. Our study will provide an overall estimate of the incidence of MH. Subgroup analysis will assess the incidence of MH according to age, gender, geographical region, race, and the provoking agent if possible. The review will benefit patients, healthcare providers, and policymakers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and informed consent are not required, as the study will be a literature review and will not involve direct contact with patients or alterations to patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol for this review has been registered in the PROSPERO network (registration number: CRD42017076628).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicIon channel regulation and functionFrench-language works237,207