Adverse effects of corticosteroid therapy in neuromuscular diseased patients are common and receive insufficient prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid therapy is known to have long-term adverse effects and complications, but our knowledge of the adverse effects of corticosteroids within a neuromuscular patient population is limited. AIMS OF THE STUDY: We sought to determine the prevalence and impact of corticosteroid use in a population of patients with neuromuscular diseases, as well as possible clinical associations for presence of adverse effects. METHODS: A retrospective chart review from a comprehensive database from a tertiary care neuromuscular clinic spanning 1988-2007 was performed. RESULTS: Corticosteroids led to adverse effects in 74% of exposed patients, without proper prophylaxis considered in about 50% of cases. There were no associations determined to have impact upon adverse effect occurrence, including the exposure to cumulative corticosteroid dosing or diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroid therapy is frequently associated with adverse effects, although prediction of their occurrence is not clear. Prophylaxis of their occurrence is underperformed in our tertiary care clinic patient population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".