MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210775271 · doi:10.1016/j.bpsgos.2022.01.006

Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers in DSM-5–Defined Disorders and COVID-19: Evidence From Published Meta-analyses

2022· review· en· W4210775271 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela Duong, Hyunjin Jeong, Dana El Soufi El Sabbagh, Ana C. Andreazza

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Psychiatry Global Open Science · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTryptophan and brain disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineOutbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)C-reactive proteinInterleukinPandemicInterleukin 6CoronavirusInflammationSystemic inflammation2019-20 coronavirus outbreakImmunologyMeta-analysisVirologyInternal medicineDiseaseCytokine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak of the novel SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) as a global pandemic. At the center of SARS-CoV-2 is the activation of inflammatory markers; remarkably, interleukin 6 and C-reactive protein seem to be consistently elevated in patients with SARS-CoV-2. Here, we showed that increased systemic C-reactive protein and interleukin 6 are common biomarkers of both severe COVID-19 and DSM-5-defined disorders. However, it is not known whether patients with psychiatric disorders with preexisting increased interleukin 6 and C-reactive protein are more vulnerable to severe complications of COVID-19 because of the additive inflammatory processes.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.014
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.375
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.086 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Psychiatry Global Open ScienceSame topicTryptophan and brain disordersFrench-language works237,207