MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130253221 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043625

Prospective meta-analysis protocol on randomised trials of renin–angiotensin system inhibitors in patients with COVID-19: an initiative of the International Society of Hypertension

2021· article· en· W3130253221 on OpenAlexaff
Sonali R. Gnanenthiran, Claudio Borghi, Dylan Burger, Fadi J. Charchar, Neil R Poulter, Markus P. Schlaich, U. Muscha Steckelings, George S. Stergiou, Maciej Tomaszewski, Thomas Unger, Richard D. Wainford, Bryan Williams, Anthony Rodgers, Aletta E. Schutte

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Meta-analysisClinical trialRenin–angiotensin systemProtocol (science)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMEDLINEIntensive care medicineAlternative medicineInternal medicineBlood pressureVirologyPathologyDiseaseOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Whether ACE inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) therapy should be continued, initiated or ceased in patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Given the widespread use of ACEi/ARBs worldwide, guidance on the use of these drugs is urgently needed. This prospective meta-analysis aims to pool data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the safety and efficacy of ACEi/ARB therapy in adults infected with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RCTs will be eligible if they compare patients with COVID-19 randomised to ACEi/ARB continuation or commencement versuss no ACEi/ARB therapy; study duration ≥14 days; recruitment completed between March 2020 and May 2021. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality at ≤30 days. Secondary outcomes will include mechanical ventilation, admission to intensive care or cardiovascular events at short-term follow-up (≤30 days) and all-cause mortality at longer-term follow-up (>1 month). Prespecified subgroup analyses will assess the effect of sex; age; comorbidities; smoking status; ethnicity; country of origin on all-cause mortality. A search of ClinicalTrials.gov has been performed, which will be followed by a formal search of trial registers, preprint servers, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify RCTs that meet inclusion criteria. To date, a search of ClinicalTrials.gov identified 21 potentially eligible trials for this meta-analysis. We will request trial investigators/sponsors to contribute standardised grouped tabular outcome data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval and informed consent will be the responsibility of the individual RCTs. Dissemination of results will occur by peer-reviewed publication. The results of our analysis can inform public health policy and clinical decision making regarding ACEi/ARB use in patients with COVID-19 on a global scale.

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)0.082
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.134
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0820.134
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0260.024
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.013

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207