Mean platelet volume in acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have suggested there may be statistically significant differences in mean platelet volume (MPV) between the onset and remission of acute pancreatitis (AP). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to better characterize the correlation between MPV and AP by identifying all relevant studies and summarizing their results. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar from January 2000 to December 2019 to identify all studies that reported MPV at the onset or remission of AP, or both. Effect estimates from each study were extracted and combined using the random-effect, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to appraise the quality of the included studies. RESULTS: =72%, P≤0.001) was observed. Subgroup analysis indicated comparable MPV in relation to the severity of AP. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was detected between AP patients and controls at either onset (P=0.760) or remission (P=0.700) of the disease. No statistically significant publication bias was detected (Eggers' regression P=0.938). Subgroup analysis suggested age (P<0.001) and sex (P=0.01) adjustment as potential sources of heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: MPV is smaller at the onset of AP. Further clinical evaluation is needed to assess its potential prognostic value.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".