MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206600220 · doi:10.1155/2022/6690638

Evaluating the Effects of Heat-Clearing Traditional Chinese Medicine in Stable Bronchiectasis by a Series of N-of-1 Trials

2022· article· en· W4206600220 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Suna Zi, Haiyin Huang, Peilan Yang, Minhua Xu, Yingen Wu, Zhenwei Wang, Fei Ge, Xinlin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanghai University of Traditional Chinese MedicineNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMcMaster University
KeywordsDecoctionMedicineTraditional Chinese medicineCrossover studyInternal medicineClinical trialRandomized controlled trialStatistical significanceAlternative medicinePathologyPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose. The purpose of this study is to study the effects of heat-clearing Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) in the stable stage of bronchiectasis via N-of-1 trials. Methods. The N-of-1 trials in this study were randomized and double-blinded with crossover comparisons consisting of three pairs. Each pair was of two 4-week periods. Each patient took the individualized decoction in the experimental period and the individualized decoction was removed of heat-clearing drugs, mainly including heat-clearing and detoxifying drugs, in the control period for three weeks. After three weeks, the patients stopped taking the decoction for one week. The primary outcome was from patients’ self-reporting symptoms scores on a 1–7-point Likert scale. Mixed-effects models were used to conduct statistical analysis on these N-of-1 trials. Results. Of the 21 patients enrolled, 15 completed three pairs of N-of-1 trials (71.43%). (1) Seen from the individual level, no statistical difference between the experimental decoction and the control ( <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>P</a:mi> </a:math> &gt; 0.05) was observed. However, 5 patients found better decoctions according to the clinical criteria. (2) As revealed by the group data of all the N-of-1 trials, the control was better than the individualized decoction in terms of symptom scores on the Likert scale (1.94 ± 0.69 versus 2.08 ± 0.68, <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <c:mi>P</c:mi> </c:math> = 0.04, mean difference, and 95% CI: 0.19 (0.01, 0.37)) and on CAT scores (13.66 ± 6.57 versus 13.95 ± 6.97, <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <e:mi>P</e:mi> </e:math> = 0.04, mean difference, and 95% CI: 0.86 (0.042, 1.67)), but such differences were not clinically significant. The other outcomes, such as Likert scale score of respiratory symptoms and 24-hour sputum volume, showed no statistical difference. Conclusion. The experimental design of this study can make the TCM individualized treatment fully play its role and can detect the individualized tendencies according to the severity of phlegm and heat in some subjects. With the intermittent use or reduced use of heat-clearing drugs, most of the subjects, at the group level, enrolled in the series of N-of-1 trials may improve the symptoms and quality of life while saving the cost of TCM and reducing the potential side effects of heat-clearing TCM. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.goc (NCT03147443).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-based Complementary and Alternative MedicineSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207