MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399139553 · doi:10.1177/09727531241243126

Evaluation of Effectiveness and Safety of First-line Drugs Used in the Treatment of Peripheral Neuropathy Among Elderly Population—A Randomised, Open-label, Active Comparator Study

2024· article· en· W4399139553 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

VenueAnnals of Neurosciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripheral neuropathyOpen labelPopulationInternal medicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Peripheral neuropathy is four times more common in geriatric age group patients compared to younger ones. Most of the trials have targeted adult population, and there is scarcity of data in the geriatric age group. Purpose A real-world study was planned on geriatric patients suffering from peripheral neuropathy to analyse the effectiveness and safety of first-line drugs used in the management of peripheral neuropathy. Methods It was a randomised, open-label, active comparator clinical trial in which first-line drugs for peripheral neuropathy were compared [amitriptyline (10 mg), duloxetine (30 mg), gabapentin (300 mg), pregabalin (75 mg)] for their effectiveness and safety. The trial duration was eight weeks. The modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (mTCNS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) were used for effectiveness. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events. Multiple groups were compared with Kruskal–Wallis test, and post hoc analysis was performed with Dunn’s test. A p value <.05 was considered significant. Results A total of 80 patients were recruited (20 patients in each arm) with a mean age of 65.4 years, and 56.3% were male. Pregabalin was superior to amitriptyline ( p = .04) and duloxetine ( p = .02) in reducing mTCNS. Similarly, pregabalin was superior to amitriptyline ( p = .041 and duloxetine ( p = .009) in reducing GDS score. All drugs were comparable in reducing VRS ( p = .17). A total of 14 adverse events were observed, out of which constipation, sedation and dizziness were common. Maximum adverse events were observed in the duloxetine arm (6/14). Conclusion Pregabalin was superior to amitriptyline and duloxetine, whereas it was comparable to gabapentin in effectiveness. Constipation was the most common adverse event, but the central nervous system was the most involved in adverse events.

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)0.002
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.266 · 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