MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010945518 · doi:10.1016/s2213-2600(20)30047-3

Drug-associated adverse events in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: an individual patient data meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3010945518 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhiyi Lan, Nafees Ahmad, Parvaneh Baghaei, Linda Barkāne, Andrea Benedetti, Sarah K. Brode, James C. M. Brust, Jonathon R. Campbell, Vicky Chang, Dennis Falzon, Lorenzo Guglielmetti, Petros Isaakidis, Russell R. Kempker, Maia Kipiani, Līga Kukša, Christoph Lange, Rafael Laniado-Laborı́n, Payam Nahid, Denise S. Rodrigues, Rupak Singla, Zarir Udwadia, Dick Menzies, Parvaneh Baghaei, L Barkane, Andrea Benedetti, SK Brode, JCM Brust, J. R. Campbell, V.W.L. Chang, RR Kempker, Maia Kipiani, C Lange, Rafael Laniado-Laborín, Payam Nahid, Rupak Singla, ZF Udwadia, Dick Menzies

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Respiratory Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSinai Health SystemWest Park Healthcare CentreMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFogarty International CenterCenters for Disease Control and PreventionInfectious Diseases Society of AmericaWorld Health OrganizationEuropean Respiratory SocietyCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAmerican Thoracic Society
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectTuberculosisDrugMeta-analysisIntensive care medicineMultiple drug resistanceMEDLINEPharmacologyInternal medicineDrug resistancePathologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.037
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.416
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.049 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations270
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Respiratory MedicineSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207