Appendectomy and risk of Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Braak's hypothesis suggests that α-synuclein may enter the central nervous system through the enteric nervous system and contribute to the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease (PD). The appendix, enriched in α-synuclein, has been proposed as a possible entry point in PD pathogenesis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between appendectomy and PD risk using newly available data. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase through September 10, 2024, to identify studies on appendectomy and PD risk. Two independent reviewers screened and assessed articles for eligibility with a third reviewer involved in cases of disagreement. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data for meta-analysis were pooled using a random-effects model and analyzed in Review Manager 5.4. Meta-regression, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: = 0.89). Subgroup analyses showed similar findings. Sensitivity analyses did not change the estimate. Conclusion: This analysis suggests no association between appendectomy and PD risk.
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".