Detailed statistical analysis plan for ALBINO: effect of Allopurinol in addition to hypothermia for hypoxic-ischemic Brain Injury on Neurocognitive Outcome — a blinded randomized placebo-controlled parallel group multicenter trial for superiority (phase III)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite therapeutic hypothermia (TH) and neonatal intensive care, 45-50% of children affected by moderate-to-severe neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) die or suffer from long-term neurodevelopmental impairment. Additional neuroprotective therapies are sought, besides TH, to further improve the outcome of affected infants. Allopurinol - a xanthine oxidase inhibitor - reduced the production of oxygen radicals and subsequent brain damage in pre-clinical and preliminary human studies of cerebral ischemia and reperfusion, if administered before or early after the insult. This ALBINO trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of allopurinol administered immediately after birth to (near-)term infants with early signs of HIE. METHODS/DESIGN: The ALBINO trial is an investigator-initiated, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, multi-national parallel group comparison for superiority investigating the effect of allopurinol in (near-)term infants with neonatal HIE. Primary endpoint is long-term outcome determined as survival with neurodevelopmental impairment versus death versus non-impaired survival at 2 years. RESULTS: The primary analysis with three mutually exclusive responses (healthy, death, composite outcome for impairment) will be on the intention-to-treat (ITT) population by a generalized logits model according to Bishop, Fienberg, Holland (Bishop YF, Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Therory and Practice, 1975) and ."will be stratified for the two treatment groups. DISCUSSION: The statistical analysis for the ALBINO study was defined in detail in the study protocol and implemented in this statistical analysis plan published prior to any data analysis. This is in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03162653. Registered on 22 May 2017.
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 | 0.055 | 0.109 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.202 | 0.021 |
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".