MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021889050 · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000003345

Ketamine and Magnesium for Refractory Neuropathic Pain

2020· article· en· W3021889050 on OpenAlexaff
Gisèle Pickering, Véronique Morel, Alexandrine Corriger, Fatiha Giron, Fabienne Marcaillou, Assiya Bidar-Beauvallot, Évelyne Chandèze, Céline Lambert, Lise Bernard, Noémie Delage

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsOttawa Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKetamineMedicinePlaceboAnesthesiaAnalgesicNeuropathic painCrossover studyRefractory (planetary science)Clinical endpointRandomized controlled trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ketamine is often used for the management of refractory chronic pain. There is, however, a paucity of trials exploring its analgesic effect several weeks after intravenous administration or in association with magnesium. The authors hypothesized that ketamine in neuropathic pain may provide pain relief and cognitive-emotional benefit versus placebo and that a combination with magnesium may have an additive effect for 5 weeks. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled study (NCT02467517) included 20 patients with neuropathic pain. Each ketamine-naïve patient received one infusion every 35 days in a random order: ketamine (0.5 mg/kg)/placebo or ketamine (0.5 mg/kg)/magnesium sulfate (3g) or placebo/placebo.The primary endpoint was the area under the curve of daily pain intensity for a period of 35 days after infusion. Secondary endpoints included pain (at 7, 15, 21 and 28 days) and health-related, emotional, sleep, and quality of life questionnaires. RESULTS: Daily pain intensity was not significantly different between the three groups (n = 20) over 35 days (mean area under the curve = 185 ± 100, 196 ± 92, and 187 ± 90 pain score-days for ketamine, ketamine/magnesium, and placebo, respectively, P = 0.296). The effect size of the main endpoint was -0.2 (95% CI [-0.6 to 0.3]; P = 0.425) for ketamine versus placebo, 0.2 (95% CI [-0.3 to 0.6]; P = 0.445) for placebo versus ketamine/magnesium and -0.4 (95% CI [-0.8 to 0.1]; P = 0.119) for ketamine versus ketamine/magnesium. There were no significant differences in emotional, sleep, and quality of life measures. During placebo, ketamine, and ketamine/magnesium infusions, 10%, 20%, and 35% of patients respectively reported at least one adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this trial in neuropathic pain refuted the hypothesis that ketamine provided pain relief at 5 weeks and cognitive-emotional benefit versus placebo and that a combination with magnesium had any additional analgesic effect.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations65
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207