MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155566811 · doi:10.1016/j.arrct.2021.100123

Phase IIB Randomized Trial on the Use of 4-Aminopyridine in Guillain-Barré Syndrome

2021· article· en· W3155566811 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jay M. Meythaler, Robert Brunner, Jean Péduzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFood and Drug AdministrationU.S. Food and Drug Administration
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialPlaceboPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of orally delivered 4-aminopyridine (4-AP) in persons with Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) >6 months from initial diagnosis. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. SETTING: Tertiary care clinical outpatient program. PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen participants enrolled (14 male, 5 female; N=19), neurologic impairment secondary to GBS and functional loss on the FIM motor score (stable for ≥12mo) and >3.0 but <5.0 on the American Spinal Injury motor scale. Twelve participants (mean age, 59y; range, 23-77y) completed the study. INTERVENTIONS: A 4-AP dose-escalation study with 8 weeks in each period with a 3-week washout period, followed by 3 months open-label follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: FIM motor score was the primary outcome measure; also evaluated were the American Spinal Injury motor strength score (all limbs), handheld dynamometer, 6-minute walk test, Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short Form, Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, pain, GBS disability scale, Jepsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test and Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test, Get Up and Go Test, McGill Pain Inventory, Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique, and participant self-evaluation. RESULTS: =.065). Patients subjectively could always tell when they were on the active agent usually by tingling sensations or a sense of wellness. No statistically significant differences were found for other outcome measures although there were strong trends. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the safety of 4-AP in the patient population with GBS as the predominate goal of the study. A trend toward improved function after treatment was noted with most patients electing to stay on the medication after the trial.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized triallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical TranslationSame topicPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersFrench-language works237,207