MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021521108 · doi:10.2196/15163

Effect of Testosterone Treatment on Cardiovascular Events in Men: Protocol for a Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· article· en· W3021521108 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
HuiJun Chih, Christopher M. Reid, Bu B. Yeap, Girish Dwivedi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCurtin University of Technology
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisMyocardial infarctionPercutaneous coronary interventionSystematic reviewMEDLINEInternal medicineCINAHLClinical trialPsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Testosterone prescriptions have increased dramatically in recent decades, with increasing usage in men. Despite epidemiological associations reported high circulating concentrations of endogenous androgens and low risk of cardiovascular events and mortality, the effects of exogenous androgens in the form of testosterone therapy for maintaining physiological circulating androgen concentrations on the cardiovascular system remain uncertain with no published meta-analysis on this topic. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of prescribed testosterone treatment, in all forms and durations, from well-developed randomized controlled trials, on cardiovascular events in men aged 18 years or older. METHODS: Peer-reviewed journal articles published from 1980 to 2019 will be searched from databases (ie CINAHL [Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature], Embase, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials as well as the Clinical Trial Registry). Randomized controlled trials or cluster randomized controlled trials with at least one intervention arm of testosterone and a control group of usual care or no testosterone treatment will be included in this review and meta-analysis. Studies on men with previous cardiovascular events or cardiac vascularization (coronary bypass surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention) will be excluded. Data related to primary outcomes such as clinical events of any type of stroke or transient ischemic attack, nonfatal myocardial infarction or acute coronary syndrome, emergency coronary artery revascularization, carotid surgery, cardiac mortality, and all-cause mortality will be extracted for analysis. The criteria for PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) will be followed in the evaluation of evidence. RESULTS: Search terms have been piloted and finalized. This study will be completed by the end of 2020. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol will guide a systematic literature review of the evidence around prescribed testosterone and its effect on cardiovascular events in men aged 18 years or older. The findings will inform clinical management of hypogonadal men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019134278; https://tinyurl.com/y6t7ggge. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/15163.

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 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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0250.038
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.005

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 head0.276
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207