MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391475204 · doi:10.33140/jnh.09.01.01

A Thorough Study and Meta-Analysis of The Prognostic Relevance of the C-Reactive Protein-Albumin Ratio in Acute Pancreatitis

2024· article· en· W4391475204 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hassan Saad, Mohamed E Eraky, Ahmed K El-Tahe, Mohamed Riad, Khaled Sharaf, Azza Baz, Mohamed Farid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing & Healthcare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute pancreatitisMeta-analysisAlbuminInternal medicineMedicinePancreatitisRelevance (law)C-reactive proteinGastroenterologyPolitical scienceInflammation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although most cases of acute pancreatitis (AP) are minor, severe cases are associated with a substantial risk of death. Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common illness. Therefore, it is critical to assess AP severity as soon as possible. This review aimed to ascertain the predictive significance of the CRP to albumin ratio in individuals with AP. Methods: We searched PubMed, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library electronic databases Until January 2023. Studies that reported the CRP/alb ratio at admission and its relationship to the severity or death of patients with AP were included. Using a random-effects model, we computed the pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results: This meta-analysis combined data from six trials with a total of 2244 patients. Upon admission, the CRP/alb ratio was higher in patients with severe AP than in those with mild to moderate AP (pooled MD:3.59; 95% CI:2.51- 4.68; p<0.00001). Additionally, non-survivor AP patients had a substantially higher CRP/alb ratio than survivor AP patients (pooled MD:2.12; 95% CI:0.43-3.8; p < 0.01). In conclusion, individuals with AP may benefit from a high CRP/ALB ratio as a preliminary indicator of poor prognosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.323 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing & HealthcareSame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207