Efficacy and Safety of Shenqisuxin Granule for Non-ST-segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Study Protocol for a Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Chinese herbal compound formula, Shenqisuxin granule (SQSX), promotes neovascularization and prevents in-stent restenosis in modern pharmaceutical studies and is expected to provide an effective strategy for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). Thus, this study aims to examine the efficacy and safety of SQSX for NSTEACS and initially reveal its mechanism. Methods/Design: The study is a randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled trial. A total of 66 participants will be randomly allocated to one of the following two groups. Participants in the SQSX group will receive conventional treatment plus SQSX, while the placebo group will receive conventional treatment plus placebo, both for 14 days. The primary outcome, hs-CRP, and secondary outcome the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) will be assessed at baseline, 7 ± 3 days and 14 ± 3 days. At all visit windows, other indicators including creatine kinase (CK), creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB), cardiac troponins I (cTnI), 12-lead electrocardiograph and the syndrome scores of Qi deficiency and blood stasis will be tested and metagenomic sequencing for intestinal flora will be performed. Echocardiography and safety assessment will be performed at baseline and 14 ± 3 days. Adverse events will be monitored during the trial. Discussion: The purpose of the study is to examine the efficacy and safety of SQSX to improve NSTEACS and initially reveal its mechanism. Trial Registration: China Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000029226. Registered on January 19, 2020.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".