MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404182495 · doi:10.2196/60591

Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· article· en· W4404182495 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael V. DiCaro, Brianna Yee, KaChon Lei, Kavita Batra, Buddhadeb Dawn

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisPreprintMesenchymal stem cellProtocol (science)MedicineStem-cell therapyMyocardial infarctionSystematic reviewMEDLINEIntensive care medicineComputer scienceInternal medicineAlternative medicineWorld Wide WebPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Medical therapy and interventional approaches have improved outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). However, these strategies are inadequate for replacing cells lost during tissue ischemia, thereby leaving behind noncontractile scar tissue. The anti-inflammatory and immune modulating properties of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) may prove useful in inducing functional cardiac regeneration following acute MI. OBJECTIVE: This is a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis that will aggregate and synthesize high-level clinical data on the effects of MSC therapy for acute MI. The findings of this study may serve as evidence for clinicians and researchers in guiding the use of MSC therapy as an adjunct to reperfusion and optimal medical therapy in patients with acute MI. METHODS: The proposed systematic review is registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). A systematic search of bibliographical databases, including Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane was conducted from inception to June 2023 to identify English-language human studies with adult patients receiving MSC therapy and optimal medical therapy for acute MI in comparison with respective controls. Article screening was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Data on functional cardiac outcomes and major adverse cardiac events were extracted and analyzed as primary outcomes. RESULTS: Literature search and article screening commenced in June 2023. Data extraction and analysis will be completed by October 2024. The findings will be synthesized and reported by the end of November 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis will summarize the best available updated evidence from published randomized controlled trials on the effects of MSC therapy for the treatment of acute MI. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis may shed light on the efficacy of MSC therapy in improving cardiac functional and structural parameters and reducing adverse cardiac events following acute MI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024522398; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=522398. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/60591.

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.028
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.004

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 head0.395
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207