Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and mortality risk in patients with liver cirrhosis: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liver cirrhosis represents a substantial global burden in terms of morbidity and mortality. Observational studies have reported an increased risk of death with low circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations in such patients. Because the occurrence of inadequate vitamin D status is very common in patients with liver cirrhosis, the aim of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis of observational studies in such patients to assess whether vitamin D deficiency increases their risk of mortality. METHODS: We will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL and Google Scholar from time of inception until now), conference proceedings and conduct manual searches to identify studies eligible for inclusion. There will be no restrictions based on publication status or language, and the meta-analysis will be reported in accordance with the MOOSE guidelines. We will employ random-effects meta-analysis to assess the relationship between vitamin D deficiency and risk of mortality. Quality of studies will be judged using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and between-trial heterogeneity will be evaluated by means of subgroup and sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: The study will assess the effects of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations on mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. The results will be published in a high-quality peer-reviewed journal. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42016052007 .
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 | 0.082 | 0.131 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.004 |
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.
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".