MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902779509 · doi:10.7759/cureus.3635

Type II Renal Tubular Acidosis Secondary to Topiramate: A Review

2018· review· en· W2902779509 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Asghar, Hira A Cheema, S. Mehta, Joshua Leinwand

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsMarkham Stouffville Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal tubular acidosisMetabolic acidosisTopiramateAcidosisLactic acidosisInternal medicineAnion gapIntensive care medicineEndocrinologyGastroenterologyEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topiramate (TMP) is a broad-spectrum anticonvulsant drug used to treat a wide variety of seizure disorders, for migraine prophylaxis, and for many other indications. An important side effect of TMP is metabolic acidosis, which is mediated by renal tubular defects. TMP inhibits carbonic anhydrase, an enzyme that is necessary for acid handling in the proximal renal tubule. Patients can present with asymptomatic serum electrolyte derangements, acute change in mental status, hyperventilation, cardiac arrhythmias, or other sequelae of metabolic acidosis and associated respiratory compensation. If taken chronically, TMP can cause renal stone formation, bone mineralization defects, and several other effects secondary to changes in serum and urine pH and electrolytes. There is no well-studied way to prevent metabolic acidosis in patients taking TMP, but physicians should be vigilant when prescribing this drug to patients with the history of renal diseases and other comorbidities, and aware of this potential etiology of metabolic acidosis. We present a literature review of the underlying mechanisms involved in the development of renal tubular acidosis secondary to TMP and its clinical consequences.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.326 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207