Patient-Reported Outcomes in Subjects with Painful Trigeminal Neuralgia Receiving Pregabalin: Evidence from Medical Practice in Primary Care Settings
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
Effects of pregabalin (PGB) on patient-reported health outcomes were assessed in 65 PGB-naive subjects with trigeminal neuralgia refractory to previous analgesic therapy in a prospective, multicentre observational study carried out in primary care. Twelve weeks' monotherapy with PGB (n = 36) or add-on (n = 29), reduced baseline intensity of pain by a mean +/- S.D. of -40.0 +/- 22.1 mm [-55.4%, effect size (ES) 2.32; P < 0.0001] with 59.4% of responders (pain reduction >or= 50%), and produced 34.6 +/- 29.3 additional days with no/mild pain. Anxiety/depression symptoms decreased by -3.8 +/- 3.5 and -4.5 +/- 4.2 points (ES 0.95 and 1.02; P < 0.0001), respectively. PGB improved sleep by -17.9 +/- 19.6 points (ES 1.18; P < 0.0001) and improved patient functioning (Sheehan Disability Index) by decreasing overall scoring by -8.6 +/- 5.9 points (ES 1.59; P < 0.0001). Health state (EQ-5D) increased by 31.6 +/- 22.2 mm (ES 1.67; P < 0.0001), with 0.0388 +/- 0.0374 gained quality-adjusted life-years. In spite of the small sample size, results support the effectiveness of PGB for the improvement in pain and related health symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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