Opioid-Induced Constipation Among Patients with Chronic Noncancer Pain in the United States, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom: Laxative Use, Response, and Symptom Burden Over Time
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Estimate rate of laxative inadequate response (LIR) over time among patients with chronic noncancer pain with opioid-induced constipation (OIC). METHODS: A prospective longitudinal study was conducted in United States, Canada, Germany, and United Kingdom. Patients on opioid therapy for ≥4 weeks for chronic noncancer pain and OIC completed an Internet-based survey at Baseline and Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. 1xLIR was defined as sufficient laxative use (≥1 laxative ≥ 4 times in past 2 weeks) and inadequate response (<3 bowel movements or ≥ 1 constipation symptom rated Moderate or greater). 2xLIR was sufficient laxative use of ≥2 laxatives from different drug classes and inadequate response. Descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were performed. RESULTS: 489 patients (62% female; 85% white) completed Baseline; 27% reported no laxative use; 25% had insufficient laxative use; 48% had sufficient laxative use. During follow-up, 21-28% of patients had no or insufficient laxative use. Prevalence of 1xLIR was 93% at Baseline and ranged from 59-81% across follow-up; 26% met criteria for 2xLIR (follow-up range: 11-20%). CONCLUSIONS: OIC among noncancer pain patients is a persistent and significant condition with varying utilization and response to laxatives thus increasing the ongoing burden of chronic pain. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it