MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010890173 · doi:10.15326/jcopdf.3.1.2015.0148

Overall and Cardiovascular Safety of Aclidinium Bromide in Patients With COPD: A Pooled Analysis of Six Phase III, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Studies

2016· article· en· W3010890173 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases Journal of the COPD Foundation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuscarinic antagonistPlaceboMedicineCOPDAntagonistPooled analysisInternal medicinePharmacologyMuscarinic acetylcholine receptorRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaMeta-analysisReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

-receptor-selective, twice-daily (BID), long-acting muscarinic antagonist, is rapidly hydrolyzed in human plasma, resulting in low systemic exposure and urinary excretion. We evaluated the overall and cardiovascular (CV) safety of aclidinium in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by pooling data from 6 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies of ≥1 month's duration. METHODS: : Aclidinium 400µg BID has a good safety profile and this pooled analysis found no evidence of increased CV or cerebrovascular risk compared with placebo in patients with moderate to severe COPD. Further studies are needed in high-risk 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.267 · 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