MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008272502 · doi:10.1177/154510970200100105

Update on Didanosine

2002· review· en· W2008272502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David A. Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicHIV Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDidanosineMedicineZidovudineIntensive care medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antiretroviral therapyInternal medicineImmunologyViral loadViral disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Didanosine (ddl) has been a cornerstone of HIV management since it was made available in October 1991. Didanosine was originally introduced as an alternative to zidovudine (ZDV) for patients who were intolerant of ZDV or experienced disease progression during ZDV monotherapy. Didanosine is now used extensively as an integral component of multidrug combination regimens in both adults and children with HIV infection, and is now available for once-daily administration in the United States, Canada, and Europe. The recently approved Videx EC is an enteric-coated didanosine capsule dosed as one capsule, once daily. This paper provides an update of recently published studies on the use of ddl in combination anti-HIV therapy. In particular, these studies examine the rationale for the use of ddl as first-line anti-HIV therapy, and describe newer findings concerning its long-term efficacy, side effects, compliance, resistance, and once-daily use. The increased survival of HIV-infected patients is largely attributed to the introduction of the triple combination drug therapy but is probably also due to the long-term clinical efficacy of ddl.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS CareSame topicHIV Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207