MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220746665 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056545

Effectiveness and safety of bee venom pharmacopuncture for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review protocol

2022· review· en· W4220746665 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Health Industry Development Institute
KeywordsMedicineBee venomRheumatoid arthritisProtocol (science)Traditional medicineAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the common autoimmune disease with low quality of life. The representative treatment is medication and medication usage has improved through update of clinical guidelines, however, there are still limitations. Bee venom (BV) has been reported to have meaningful therapeutic effects and the possibility of alternative options for RA through several types of studies, but there is no well-organised and recent published systematic review (SR). METHODS: We will search randomised controlled trials about the BV on RA from the inception to 31 May 2022 in various databases, manual research and contacting authors. Electronic databases will include MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, CiNii, J-STAGE, KoreaMed, Korean Medical Database, Korean Studies Information Service System, National Digital Science Library, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System. With screening and reviewing process, we will identify the eligible studies and extract the needed data. The primary outcome will be the disease activity scores indicating the improvement of RA symptoms (American College of Rheumatology response criteria 20, 50, 70), functions (Health Assessment Questionnaire, Disease Activity Score of 28 joints), joint (Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index), pain (Visual Analogue Scale, Numerical Rating Scale) and effective rate. The secondary outcomes will be the RA-related blood test levels and adverse events. We will perform a meta-analysis by Review Manager software, the assessment of risk of bias by Cochrane Collaboration 'risk of bias' and the determination of quality of evidence by Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our SR will suggest the clinical evidence of the use of BV for RA to patient, clinicians and policymakers. We will publish our results in a peer-review journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021238058.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.364 · 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