MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Can an Educational Program Optimize PDE5i Therapy? A Study of Canadian Primary Care Practices

2007· article· en· W1502800254 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalVancouver Coastal HealthMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonPrograms for Assessment of Technology in Health Research InstituteJewish General HospitalMcGill University Health CentreSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
FundersSolar Energy Technologies OfficePfizer CanadaPfizer
KeywordsPharmacotherapyPrimary careMedicineFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The importance of patient instructions, designed to optimize therapy with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), has recently been demonstrated. AIM: To evaluate the impact of an educational program for new sildenafil users against usual ED management in Canadian primary care practices. METHODS: This multicenter, 6-month cluster randomized prospective study was conducted across Canada in general practitioners' offices where sites were randomized to receive a treatment optimization program (TOP) tool at visit 1 (TOP sites) or not to receive the TOP tool (non-TOP sites) while continuing with usual practice. Study participants were men seeking medical attention for ED and who were sildenafil naïve. The TOP tool consisted of a tear-off sheet, a brochure, and a video. Study drug was not provided to the patients. Sildenafil samples and prescriptions were dispensed as per usual care practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) questionnaire was used to determine treatment satisfaction at visit 2 (month 3) and visit 3 (month 6). Patient and physician satisfaction with the TOP tool was assessed using self-reported questionnaires. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of 2,573 patients from 231 primary care sites. At visits 2 and 3, treatment satisfaction with sildenafil was high with almost 9 patients out of 10 satisfied with treatment. No significant statistical differences were observed in the EDITS scores between the TOP and the non-TOP groups at visits 2 and 3. More than 80% of the participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the video and the brochure. More than 8 out of 10 participating physicians (84%) would use the TOP tool in their current practice if available. CONCLUSIONS: TOP is a valuable and time-efficient ED management tool providing benefits to newly diagnosed ED patients and to their physicians.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.283 · 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