MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390636381 · doi:10.1186/s12893-023-02292-0

Systematic review of the significance of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in anastomotic leak after gastrointestinal surgeries

2024· article· en· W4390636381 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratioConfidence intervalStrictly standardized mean differenceSubgroup analysisInternal medicineGastroenterologyLymphocyteBiomarkerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The inflammatory response is thought to be a critical initiator of epigenetic alterations. The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a biomarker of inflammation, is computed by dividing the number of neutrophils by the number of lymphocytes. The primary goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the pre-operative NLR of gastrointestinal surgery patients who had an anastomotic leak (AL) in comparison to those who did not AL. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search for relevant papers published before May 4, 2022, using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was pooled in meta-analysis to yield a summary estimate. We utilized the random-effects model to create pooled effects since we discovered a substantial heterogeneity level. For evaluating quality, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was implemented. RESULTS: The research comprised 12 studies with a total of 2940 individuals who had GI operations, 353 of whom went on to develop AL. We discovered that patients who had GI surgeries and acquired AL had significantly higher NLR levels than those who did not (random-effects model: SMD = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.11-1.38, p = 0.02). Patients with AL showed significantly higher NLR levels than control group in retrospective studies (SMD = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.20-1.66, p=0.01) but not in prospective studies (SMD = - 0.11, 95% CI = - 0.65-0.43, p = 0.69), according to the subgroup analysis based on research design. Subgroup analysis based on ethnicity yielded that white patients with AL exhibited significantly higher NLR values than the control group (SMD = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.01-2.68, p = 0.04) but this result was not applied to East Asian patients (SMD = 0.14, 95% CI = -0.13-0.41, p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: Our research suggests a potential association between preoperative NLR and postoperative AL. However, it is essential to acknowledge the variability in the findings, with significantly higher NLR levels observed in retrospective studies and among white patients, but not consistently replicated in prospective studies and among East Asian patients. Further investigations with larger and more diverse cohorts are warranted to validate these findings and explore potential factors contributing to the observed discrepancies.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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