MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090888491 · doi:10.1111/jan.14559

Nursing interventions in autologous stem cell transplantation for autoimmune diseases

2020· article· en· W3090888491 on OpenAlexaff
Loren Nilsen, Bruna Nogueira dos Santos, Vanessa Cristina Leopoldo, Paula Elaine Diniz dos Reis, Maria Carolina Oliveira, Alexander M. Clark, Renata C. de C. P. Silveira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationType 1 diabetesDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineRashDiseaseNauseaMultiple sclerosisAdverse effectImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To identify clinical symptoms and nursing interventions for stem cell therapy in autoimmune diseases. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study. METHODS: This study was undertaken with patients diagnosed with type 1 diabetes or multiple sclerosis, undergoing autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation from January 2004 - December 2018. Data were registered in a questionnaire, taken during the conditioning regimen comprising cyclophosphamide and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were used for data analysis. RESULTS: There were 68 and 23 patients in the multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes groups respectively. Skin rash, nausea, vomiting and fever were more frequent and diverse in the type 1 diabetes group. Steroids were used as prophylaxis for anti-thymocyte globulin-associated allergic reactions in 97% of multiple sclerosis patients. Most of the identified symptoms and nursing interventions were more associated with one or other disease group (p < .05) and were more frequent in the type 1 diabetes group. CONCLUSION: Patients with autoimmune diseases who underwent stem cell therapy present differences in their repertoire of adverse events and require disease-specific nursing actions. IMPACT: Our results may enable nurses to establish transplant and disease-specific guidelines to improve prevention and management of adverse events and therefore optimize patient care and therapeutic success.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207