MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390670506 · doi:10.9734/jabb/2023/v26i12668

A Critical Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pharmacological Treatments of Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria

2023· article· en· W4390670506 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yara Maria da Silva Pires, Flávia Deffert, Thaís Humenhuk, Ana Paula Oliveira Vilela, Aline de Fátima Bonetti, Astrid Wiens

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Biology & Biotechnology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Federal do Paraná
KeywordsParoxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuriaMedicineFamily medicineExcellenceAlternative medicineCritical appraisalPopulationMEDLINECLARITYSystematic reviewScopusPathologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare chronic disease characterized by complement-mediated hemolysis, thrombosis, and bone marrow failure. This study aims to identify methodological limitations in Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the treatment of PNH. Thus, we critically evaluate the guidelines, highlighting relevant recommendations supported by high-quality evidence to improve healthcare strategies.
 Methodology: A systematic search was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, COCHRANE, and TRIP databases. From 1995 initially identified references, 1649 articles underwent title and abstract screening. Twenty-three references were selected for full-text screening. Ultimately, 12 CPGs were included. Four independent reviewers assessed the CPGs’ methodological quality using the instruments “Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II” (AGREE II) and “Recommendation Excellence” (AGREE-REX). Their characteristics, as well as any differences in recommendations, were summarized and compared.
 Results: Twelve guidelines published from 2011 to 2022 by Spain, Brazil, Mexico, Israel, Canada, Turkey, Scotland, and the United Kingdom were included. The UK’s and Brazil’s CPGs received the highest scores. Overall, the CPGs scored strongly in the domains of “Scope and Purpose” and “Clarity of Presentation” since they addressed fundamental aspects, such as aim, specific health questions, target population, and language. All guidelines presented deficiencies in the “Editorial Independence” in AGREE II, and “Values and Preferences” in AGREE-REX, demonstrating the need for a careful revision and improvement of future versions.
 Conclusion: We found disparities in the methodological quality of the available CPGs. Despite being extremely important, recommendations on adapting treatment to local policies and further updates that include newly approved medications were absent. Approaches that prioritize the engagement of methodologists and multidisciplinary collaborators may also lead to higher quality CPGs for treating PNH.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.437 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Biology & BiotechnologySame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207