MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403811436 · doi:10.1681/asn.20246rycvtp5

Effect of Ambient Temperature on Renal Colic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4403811436 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Csaba P. Kövesdy, Hoimonty Mazumder, Farah Faizah, Naznin Alam, Xichen Mou, Hongmei Zhang, Abu Mohd Naser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisRenal colicMedicineUrologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicinePathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Renal colic is a clinical manifestation characterized by spasmodic pain in the lower back, which is commonly caused by kidney stones. Although limited, recent evidence suggests increased risk of kidney outcomes in exposure to elevated ambient temperature. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to elucidate the effect of ambient temperature on renal colic. Methods: We systematically searched four leading bibliographic databases (PubMed, CINAHL complete, Scopus, and Web of Sciences) and additional sources from the inception of each database to February 12, 2024. Epidemiological studies that met a pre-determined eligibility criteria following PECOS (population, exposure, comparator, outcome, and study design) were included. The effect sizes from individual studies were standardized to Cohen’s d and we performed a meta-analysis with a random-effects model to estimate a pooled Cohen’s d and constructed a 95% confidence interval. We performed further sub-group analyses by study region, sample size, study design, and mean age of study participants. Results: Out of 1463 primarily retrieved articles, seven articles representing 758666 study participants underwent meta-analysis. Most of the studies were conducted in the US (3) followed by China (2), Canada (1), and Israel (1). Ambient temperature demonstrated a significant effect on renal colic [Cohen’s d: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.41, p-value < 0.001, I2 = 99.08%]. Subgroup analyses for potential explanation of heterogeneity demonstrated statistically significant between-group variance for study region [America- Cohen’s d: 0.25, (95% CI: 0.11, 0.39); Asia - Cohen’s d: 0.44, (95% CI: 0.42, 0.45)] and study design [Case-crossover- Cohen’s d: 0.46, (95% CI: 0.01, 0.93); Retrospective cohort - Cohen’s d: 0.44, (95% CI: 0.42, 0.45); Time-series - Cohen’s d: 0.21, (95% CI: 0.17, 0.25)]. Conclusion: These findings suggest a moderate effect of ambient temperature on renal colic.Figure 1: Forest plot showing summary-effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.048
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 the American Society of NephrologySame topicInfant Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207