Therapeutic outcomes with surgical and medical management for primary aldosteronism: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Treatment strategies for primary aldosteronism (PA) include unilateral adrenalectomy and medical treatment with mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonists. Whether these two different treatment strategies are comparable in mitigating the detrimental effect of PA on outcomes is still debated. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and synthesise existing literature comparing clinical outcomes after treatment in patients with PA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic and comprehensive search will be performed using PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE, for studies published until December 2022. Observational and interventional studies will be eligible for inclusion. The quality of observational studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, while interventional studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice Organization of Care tool. The collected evidence will be narratively synthesised. We will perform meta-analysis to pool estimates from studies considered to be homogeneous. Reporting of the systematic review and meta-analysis will be in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this study is based solely on the published literature, no ethics approval is required. This review will aim to provide some estimates on outcomes, including survival, rates of clinical and biochemical control, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, as well as data on quality of life and renal function, in patients with PA treated surgically or with MR antagonists. The study findings will be presented at scientific meetings and will be published in an international peer-reviewed scientific journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362506.
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 | 0.067 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.006 |
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".