Lipid Profile in Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Studies have investigated the lipid profile in ALS, including the levels of total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), higher low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and the associations with mortality of ALS, but the results were inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to systematically answer this unsolved question. Methods: We searched all the related studies that probed into the association between serum lipid levels and ALS based on PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library from inception through to February 2019. The quality of the included studies was evaluated by using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). All the statistical analyses of this meta-analysis were performed using Stata version 12.0. Results: Fourteen studies with a total of 4386 ALS patients and 3938 controls were included. Among them, ten studies indicated that compared to the controls, ALS patients from both European and Asian had lower levels of TG and HDL; but the levels of TC and LDL were higher in ALS patients from European. However, after systemic analyses, the altered TC level was significant only in Asian ALS patients; the differences of other lipids were not significant. Analyses of four studies showed that the levels all lipids were not associated with overall mortality in ALS. Conclusion: The results of present study showed that Asian ALS patients had lower TC levels than controls, and levels of all the lipids were not associated with mortality of ALS.
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 | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".