MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108884852 · doi:10.1177/2054358120968959

The DIalysis Symptom COntrol-Restless Legs Syndrome (DISCO-RLS) Trial: A Protocol for a Randomized, Crossover, Placebo-Controlled Blinded Trial

2020· article· en· W3108884852 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Collister, Kayla Pohl, Gwen Herrington, Shun Fu Lee, Christian G. Rabbat, Karthik Tennankore, Deborah Zimmermann, Navdeep Tangri, Ron Wald, Braden Manns, Rita S. Suri, Annie‐Claire Nadeau‐Fredette, Rémi Goupil, Samuel A. Silver, Michael Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestless Legs Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversité de MontréalPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRestless legs syndromePlaceboRandomized controlled trialHemodialysisDialysisCrossover studyRopiniroleAdverse effectEnd stage renal diseaseKidney diseasePhysical therapyInternal medicineDiseaseInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Restless legs syndrome (RLS) affects approximately 30% of patients with end-stage kidney disease and is associated with impaired sleep and health-related quality of life. Medications used to treat RLS in patients receiving dialysis may have an increased risk of adverse events with dose titration, and residual RLS symptoms are common despite the use of effective treatments. Randomized controlled trials of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic therapy for RLS in hemodialysis are needed. OBJECTIVE: To perform a randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled blinded trial of pharmacologic therapy for RLS in hemodialysis. DESIGN/SETTING: The DIalysis Symptom COntrol-Restless Legs Syndrome (DISCO-RLS) trial is a randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled blinded trial of fixed low-dose pharmacologic therapy in patients receiving hemodialysis in 10 centers across Canada. It uses patient partners in its design, conduct, and reporting. PARTICIPANTS: Adults receiving thrice-weekly hemodialysis for at least 3 months with RLS of at least mild symptoms defined International Restless Legs Syndrome Study Group Rating Scale (IRLS) of 10 or more will enter a double placebo run-in period to exclude nonadherent participants and those unable to tolerate double placebo. Seventy-two participants who completed the run-in period will be randomized to 1 of 8 treatment sequences based on modeling with 4 treatment periods. METHODS: Each treatment period lasts 4 weeks and consists of ropinirole 0.5 mg daily and gabapentin 100 mg daily, both together or neither with a double dummy placebo control for each treatment. The primary outcome is the difference in change scores of the IRLS between study treatments. Secondary outcomes are the differences in change scores of the Restless Legs Syndrome-6 Scale, patient global impression, 5-level EQ-5D version, and safety outcomes. RESULTS: This randomized, crossover, placebo-controlled blinded trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed low-dose combination of ropinirole and gabapentin in patients receiving hemodialysis with RLS. LIMITATIONS: Patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, kidney transplant recipients and those receiving peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis are not included. The intervention's long term safety and efficacy including the risk of augmentation is not captured. CONCLUSION: This randomized crossover placebo controlled blinded trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of fixed low-dose combination ropinirole and gabapentin in patients receiving hemodialysis with RLS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03806530).

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.008

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicRestless Legs Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207