MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318213574 · doi:10.2196/41555

The Inflammatory Biomarkers Behavior Profile of Patients Following Elective Degenerative Spine Surgery and Differences Compared to Those Coursing With a Postoperative Spinal Infection: Protocol for a Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4318213574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José Alberto Israel Romero Rangel, Fiacro Jiménez-Ponce, Rosa María Wong‐Chew, Juan Osvaldo Talavera Piña, Adolfo Martínez Tovar

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical site infection prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinal surgeryMedicineProtocol (science)Physical therapyBioinformaticsSurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The incidence of postoperative spinal infection (PSI) ranges from 0% to 10%, with devastating effects on the patient prognosis because of higher morbidity while increasing costs to the health care system. PSIs are elusive and difficult to diagnose, especially in the early postoperative state, because of confusing clinical symptoms, rise in serum biomarkers, or imaging studies. Current research on diagnosis has focused on serum biomarkers; nevertheless, most series rely on retrospective cohorts where biomarkers are studied individually and at different time points. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol for a systematic review that aims to determine the inflammatory biomarker behavior profile of patients following elective degenerative spine surgery and their differences compared to those coursing with PSIs. METHODS: The proposed systematic review will follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. This protocol was registered at PROSPERO on January 19, 2022. We will include studies related to biomarkers in adult patients operated on for degenerative spinal diseases and those developing PSIs. The following information will be extracted from the papers: (1) study title; (2) study author; (3) year; (4) evidence level; (5) research type; (6) diagnosis group (elective postoperative degenerative disease or PSI); (7a) region (cervical, thoracic, lumbosacral, and coccygeal); (7b) type of infection by anatomical or radiological site; (8) surgery type (including instrumentation or not); (9) number of cases; (10) mean age or individual age; (11) individual serum biomarker values from the preoperative state up to 90 days postoperative for both groups, including (10a) interleukin-6, (10b) presepsin, (10c) erythrocyte sedimentation rate, (10d) leukocyte count, (10e) neutrophil count, (10f) C-reactive protein, (10g) serum amyloid, (10h) white cell count, (10i) albumin, (10j) prealbumin, (10k) procalcitonin, (10l) retinol-associated protein, and (10m) Dickkopf-1; (11) postoperative days at symptoms or diagnosis; (12) type of organism; (13) day of starting antibiotics; (14) duration of treatment; and (15) any biases (including comorbidities, especially those affecting immunological status). All data on biomarkers will be presented graphically over time. RESULTS: No ethical approval will be required, as this review is based on published data and does not involve interaction with human participants. The search for this systematic review commenced in February 2021, and we expect to publish the findings in mid-2023. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide the behavior profile of biomarkers for PSI and patients following elective surgery for degenerative spinal diseases from the preoperative period up to 90 days postoperative, providing cutoff values on the day of diagnosis. This research will provide clinicians with highly trustable cutoff reference values for PSI diagnosis. Finally, we expect to provide a basis for future research on biomarkers that help diagnose more accurately and in a timely manner in the early stages of illness, ultimately impacting the patient's physical and mental health, and reducing the disease burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022304645; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=304645. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41555.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.019
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.005

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 head0.366
GPT teacher head0.589
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicSurgical site infection preventionFrench-language works237,207