MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Increased circulating vascular endothelial growth factor in acute myeloid leukemia patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· other· en· W6959205143 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

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Regulatory Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyeloid leukemiaVascular endothelial growth factorAngiogenesisPublication biasInclusion and exclusion criteriaVEGF receptorsCochrane LibraryMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is one of the angiogenesis regulators, which plays an important role in tumor angiogenesis and tumor progression. Current studies have found that VEGF plays an important role in hematologic diseases including acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, the circulating levels of VEGF in AML were still controversial among published studies. Methods Three databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to February 2020. All articles included in the meta-analysis met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies will be screened and data extracted by two independent investigators. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool were applied to evaluate the quality of the included studies. A random-effects model was applied to pool the standardized mean difference (SMD). Heterogeneity test was performed by the Q statistic and quantified using I2. All statistical analysis was conducted in Stata 12.0 software. Results Fourteen case-control studies were finally included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was high in our included studies (I2 = 91.1%, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis showed no significant change when any one study was excluded using random-effect methods (P > 0.05). Egger’s linear regression test showed that no publication bias existed (P > 0.05). Patients with AML, mainly those newly diagnosed and untreated, have higher VEGF levels (SMD = 0.85, 95% CI 0.28–1.42). Moreover, AML patients in n ≥ 40 group, plasma group, Asia and Africa group, and age ≥ 45 group had higher circulating VEGF levels (all P < 0.05). Conclusions Compared to healthy controls, our meta-analysis shows a significantly higher level of circulating VEGF in AML patients, and it is associated with sample size, sample type, region, and age.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2500.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.233 · 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