MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Baseline results of a living systematic review for COVID-19 clinical trial registrations

2020· preprint· en· W3033756437 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

VenueWellcome Open Research · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersWellcome TrustNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionFamily medicineClinical trialInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Background:</ns4:bold> Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was first reported in December 2019, many independent trials have been planned that aim to answer similar questions. Tools allowing researchers to review studies already underway can facilitate collaboration, cooperation and harmonisation. The <ns4:ext-link xmlns:ns5="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns5:href="https://www.iddo.org/">Infectious Diseases Data Observatory (IDDO)</ns4:ext-link> has undertaken a living systematic review (LSR) to provide an open, accessible and frequently updated resource summarising characteristics of COVID-19 study registrations. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Methods:</ns4:bold> Review of all eligible trial records identified by systematic searches as of 3 April 2020 and initial synthesis of clinical study characteristics were conducted. In partnership with <ns4:ext-link xmlns:ns5="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns5:href="https://www.exaptive.com/">Exaptive</ns4:ext-link> , an open access, cloud-based knowledge graph has been created using the results. </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Results:</ns4:bold> There were 728 study registrations which met eligibility criteria and were still active. Median (25 <ns4:sup>th</ns4:sup> , 75 <ns4:sup>th</ns4:sup> percentile) sample size was 130 (60, 400) for all studies and 134 (70, 300) for RCTs. Eight lower middle and low income countries were represented among the planned recruitment sites. Overall 109 pharmacological interventions or advanced therapy medicinal products covering 23 drug categories were studied. Majority (57%, 62/109) of them were planned only in one study arm, either alone or in combination with other interventions. There were 49 distinct combinations studied with 90% (44/49) of them administered in only one or two study arms. The data and interactive platform are available at <ns4:ext-link xmlns:ns5="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" ns5:href="https://iddo.cognitive.city/">https://iddo.cognitive.city/</ns4:ext-link> . </ns4:p> <ns4:p> <ns4:bold>Conclusions:</ns4:bold> Baseline review highlighted that the majority of investigations in the first three months of the outbreak were small studies with unique treatment arms, likely to be unpowered to provide solid evidence. The continued work of this LSR will allow a more dependable overview of interventions tested, predict the likely strength of evidence generated, allow fast and informative filtering of relevant trials for specific user groups and provide the rapid guidance needed by investigators and funders to avoid duplication of efforts. </ns4:p>

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)0.835
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.948
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.8350.948
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.000
Open science0.0200.007
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.978
GPT teacher head0.741
Teacher spread0.237 · 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