Efficacy and safety of Yiqi Huoxue Yangxin decoction combined with western medicine in patients with chronic coronary heart disease: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no evidence-based data to confirm the efficacy of Yiqi Huoxue Yangxin Decoction combined with Western medicine in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Therefore, in order to provide new medical evidence for clinical treatment, we used this protocol to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness and safety of Yiqi Huoxue Yangxin Decoction combined with Western medicine in patients with CHD. METHODS: The systematic review protocol is registered in PROSPERO under registration number CRD42022372800. The systematic literature review will follow PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The following search terms will be used in PUBMED, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wan Fang, and VIP on December 1, 2022. Two independent authors extract the following descriptive raw information from selected studies: study characteristics such as authors, year of publication, study design; patient demographic information such as number of patients, mean age, body mass index, and sex ratio. The primary outcome of interest is symptom scores. Secondary outcomes include ECG effective rate, improvement of blood lipid index, and adverse events. The Cochrane Bias Risk Tool is used independently by 2 reviewers to assess the risk of bias in included randomized controlled trials. The quality of retrospective studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our review will be reported strictly following the PRISMA criteria and the review will add to the existing literature by showing compelling evidence and improved guidance in clinic settings.
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 | 0.080 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.004 |
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".