MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[Early white blood cell count in predicting mortality after acute paraquat poisoning: a Meta-analysis].

2019· review· en· W2996308876 on OpenAlex
Yibing Li, Honghua Zhang, Guoxiu Zhang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParaquat toxicity studies and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisDiagnostic odds ratioFunnel plotOdds ratioConfidence intervalPublication biasCochrane LibraryInternal medicineLikelihood ratios in diagnostic testingWhite blood cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of early white blood cell count (WBC) in patient of acute paraquat poisoning. METHODS: The literatures about the studies on early WBC and prognosis after paraquat poisoning published in journals at home and abroad were searched. The Chinese literature database contained CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedicine Database (CBM), and the journals were limited to the core journals. The foreign language database included PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library clinical controlled trial database. The retrieval date was from the initial publication to April 22nd in 2019, without the limitation of languages. Two researchers independently extracted literature information, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate literature quality. The odds ratio (OR), sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) were combined and analyzed through the Stata 15.0 software to evaluate the predictive value of early WBC after acute paraquat poisoning. Publication bias was analyzed by Deeks funnel graph. RESULTS: = 43.5%, P > 0.05). The OR and its 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of the literature was combined through the fixed effect model. The Meta-analysis results were statistically significant (OR = 18.63, 95%CI = 13.63-25.48, P < 0.001), suggesting that the WBC was significantly correlated with the mortality of patients. The combined sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR were 0.75 (95%CI = 0.66-0.82), 0.85 (95%CI = 0.80-0.90), 5.14 (95%CI = 3.86-6.86), 0.29 (95%CI = 0.22-0.39), 17.53 (95%CI = 12.23-25.13) respectively, and the area under the SROC of the WBC was 0.88 (95%CI = 0.85-0.91). Deeks funnel plot was symmetrical (P = 0.21), and there was no obvious publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: The early WBC has a certain predictive value for the prognosis of acute paraquat poisoning patients.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.189 · 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