MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117363143 · doi:10.1186/s13063-020-04928-5

COvid-19 and high-dose VITamin D supplementation TRIAL in high-risk older patients (COVIT-TRIAL): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3117363143 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

VenueTrials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCentre hospitalier régional universitaire de LilleCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NiceAgence Nationale de la RechercheMylan
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialCholecalciferolVitamin D and neurologyClinical trialObservational studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With the lack of effective therapy, chemoprevention, and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, focusing on the immediate repurposing of existing drugs gives hope of curbing the COVID-19 pandemic. A recent unbiased genomics-guided tracing of the SARS-CoV-2 targets in human cells identified vitamin D among the three top-scoring molecules manifesting potential infection mitigation patterns. Growing pre-clinical and epidemiological observational data support this assumption. We hypothesized that vitamin D supplementation may improve the prognosis of COVID-19. The aim of this trial is to compare the effect of a single oral high dose of cholecalciferol versus a single oral standard dose on all-cause 14-day mortality rate in COVID-19 older adults at higher risk of worsening. METHODS: The COVIT-TRIAL study is an open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled superiority trial. Patients aged ≥ 65 years with COVID-19 (diagnosed within the preceding 3 days with RT-PCR and/or chest CT scan) and at least one worsening risk factor at the time of inclusion (i.e., age ≥ 75 years, or SpO2 ≤ 94% in room air, or PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg), having no contraindications to vitamin D supplementation, and having received no vitamin D supplementation > 800 IU/day during the preceding month are recruited. Participants are randomized either to high-dose cholecalciferol (two 200,000 IU drinking vials at once on the day of inclusion) or to standard-dose cholecalciferol (one 50,000 IU drinking vial on the day of inclusion). Two hundred sixty participants are recruited and followed up for 28 days. The primary outcome measure is all-cause mortality within 14 days of inclusion. Secondary outcomes are the score changes on the World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (OSCI) scale for COVID-19, and the between-group comparison of safety. These outcomes are assessed at baseline, day 14, and day 28, together with the serum concentrations of 25(OH)D, creatinine, calcium, and albumin at baseline and day 7. DISCUSSION: COVIT-TRIAL is to our knowledge the first randomized controlled trial testing the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the prognosis of COVID-19 in high-risk older patients. High-dose vitamin D supplementation may be an effective, well-tolerated, and easily and immediately accessible treatment for COVID-19, the incidence of which increases dramatically and for which there are currently no scientifically validated treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344041 . Registered on 14 April 2020 TRIAL STATUS: Recruiting. Recruitment is expected to be completed in April 2021.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.184
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.184
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.348 · 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