MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310516233 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321610

Methamphetamine-associated heart failure: a systematic review of observational studies

2022· review· en· W4310516233 on OpenAlexaff
Veena Manja, Ananya Nrusimha, Ya Gao, Aleesha Sheikh, Mark P. McGovern, Paul A. Heidenreich, Alex Sandhu, Steven M. Asch

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbstinenceObservational studyMethamphetamineHeart failureConfoundingPopulationCannabisEpidemiologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of observational studies on methamphetamine-associated heart failure (MethHF) . METHODS: Six databases were searched for original publications on the topic. Title/abstract and included full-text publications were reviewed in duplicate. Data extraction and critical appraisal for risk of bias were performed in duplicate. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies are included in the final analysis. Results could not be combined because of heterogeneity in study design, population, comparator, and outcome assessment. Overall risk of bias is moderate due to the presence of confounders, selection bias and poor matching; overall certainty in the evidence is very low. MethHF is increasing in prevalence, affects diverse racial/ethnic/sociodemographic groups with a male predominance; up to 44% have preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction. MethHF is associated with significant morbidity including worse heart failure symptoms compared with non-methamphetamine related heart failure. Female sex, methamphetamine abstinence and guideline-directed heart failure therapy are associated with improved outcomes. Chamber dimensions on echocardiography and fibrosis on biopsy predict the extent of recovery after abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing prevalence of MethHF with associated morbidity underscores the urgent need for well designed prospective studies of people who use methamphetamine to accurately assess the epidemiology, clinical features, disease trajectory and outcomes of MethHF. Methamphetamine abstinence is an integral part of MethHF treatment; increased availability of effective non-pharmacological interventions for treatment of methamphetamine addiction is an essential first step. Availability of effective pharmacological treatment for methamphetamine addiction will further support MethHF treatment. Using harm reduction principles in an integrated addiction/HF treatment programme will bolster efforts to stem the increasing tide of MethHF.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.408
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207