Effect of metformin use on graft and patient survival in kidney transplant recipients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Metformin is a first-line antihyperglycaemic agent for type 2 diabetes (T2DM). In addition to glycaemic control, it offers benefits related to cardiovascular health, weight neutrality and metabolic syndrome. However, its benefits in kidney transplant recipients remain unclear as metformin use is controversial in this population due to a lack of evidence and there are recommendations against its use in patients with poor kidney function. Hence, we seek to describe a protocol for a systematic review, which will assess the impact of metformin use on graft survival and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Methods This protocol was guided by the standards of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015. We will search empirical databases such as MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection for relevant studies conducted in kidney transplant recipients using metformin, which report outcomes related to graft and patient survival. All studies meeting these criteria in adults and published in English from inception to 2023 will be included in our review. We will employ the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for randomised controlled trials and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Intervention for non-randomised studies. We will present our data and study characteristics in a table format and determine if a meta-analysis can be performed by clinical and methodological heterogeneity, using the I 2 statistics. If a meta-analysis cannot be performed, we will provide a narrative synthesis of included studies using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis Reporting Guideline. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval will not be required for this review as the data used will be extracted from already published studies with publicly accessible data. As this study will assess the impact of metformin use on graft and patient survival in kidney transplant recipients, evidence gathered through it will be disseminated using traditional approaches that include open-access peer-reviewed publication, scientific presentations and a report. We will also disseminate our findings to appropriate academic bodies in charge of publishing guidelines related to T2DM and transplantation, as well as patient and research centred groups. PROSPERO registration number CRD42023421799.
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 | 0.050 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.005 |
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".