MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390610742 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1323292

Pioglitazone in spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage: study protocol of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial (PSSH)

2024· article· en· W4390610742 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Junhui Chen, Mingchang Li, Lei Chen, Qin-yi Xu, Tengfeng Yan, Chunlei Zhang, Ping Hu, Jianqing He, Xun Zhu, Xingen Zhu, Yuhai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsPioglitazoneMedicinePlaceboSubarachnoid hemorrhageRandomized controlled trialModified Rankin ScaleAdverse effectStroke (engine)Clinical endpointClinical trialAnesthesiaInternal medicineType 2 diabetesIschemiaDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), is a disorder that may be fatal and is primarily caused by a ruptured brain aneurysm. Despite significant leaps forward in the methods to produce aneurysms, the long-term outcomes did not much improve. Pioglitazone is a medication that has been authorized by the FDA as an agonist for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ). Pioglitazone or PPARγ has neuroprotective benefits in animal experiments both during and after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and SAH. Nevertheless, the treatment impact of Pioglitazone on humans is still unknown at this time. As a result, we will conduct a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to explore the impact of pioglitazone on SAH. Methods/Design: This trial will recruit 400 patients with SAH from four Chinese hospitals. These patients will be equally and randomly assigned to Pioglitazone and placebo control groups for up to 30 days. Scores on the modified Rankin scale (mRS) are the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes are a 30-day all-cause mortality rate, 6 months of Montreal cognitive assessment (Mo-CA), delayed cerebral ischemia, the requirement for intensive care, the incidence of sepsis, etc. All serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded during the hospital. Every primary and safety analysis was conducted based on the intention-to-treat technique. The participants were given either a matching placebo or 15 mg of pioglitazone, with dose titrated to a target of 45 mg daily. Data on the therapeutic use of pioglitazone after SAH will be provided as a consequence of the findings of this experiment. In addition, this pilot trial is the first to prospectively investigate the effectiveness and safety of pioglitazone in patients with SAH. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from the Medical Ethics Committee of 904th Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force of PLA (Wuxi Taihu Hospital, approval No. 20220701). The findings of the trial will be presented at conferences, discussed in relevant patient groups, and published in peer-reviewed journals. Clinical Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov , identifier ChiCTR2200062954.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207