MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sitagliptin and Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3211401307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hyder Osman Mirghani, Salem Ahmed S Shaman, Ibrahim Mahmoud Hussain Aljwah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research International · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSitagliptinAcute pancreatitisMedicinePancreatitisMeta-analysisInternal medicineIntensive care medicineInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Sitagliptin is a dipepidyl peptidase inhibitor (DPP-4i) with gentle antidiabetic effects with a lower risk of hypoglycemia. The association with acute pancreatitis is controversial. The current meta-analysis aimed to assess the relationship of sitagliptin and acute pancreatitis.
 Methods: The literature in PubMed and Google Scholar was searched for relevant articles published in the last ten years up to September 2021. The keywords sitagliptins, DPP-4i, acute pancreatitis were used with the protean AND or OR. Among the 204 articles retrieved, 24 full-texts were assessed for eligibility and only five studies (Three from the USA, one from Asia, and one from Canada) met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. The author name, year of publication, country, type of study, number of patients, and the duration of the study were reported.
 Results: There were five studies. The total number of patients were 729808 with 6459 events. The studies showed no increased rate of acute pancreatitis following sitagliptin use, odd ratio, 0.79, 95% CI, 0.29-2.15, a significant heterogeneity was observer, I2 for heterogeneity=98%, P-value, <001, the P-value for overall effect was 0.65 and the chi-square, 160.15.
 Interpretation and Conclusion: Sitagliptin use is not associated with acute pancreatitis.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.370
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research InternationalSame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207