Rational Drug Delineation: A Global Sensitivity Approach Based on Therapeutic Tolerability to Deviations in Execution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noncompliance to therapeutic regimen is a real public health problem with tremendous socioeconomic consequences. Instead of direct intervention to patients, which can add extra burden to the already overloaded health system, alternative strategies oriented to drugs’ own properties turns to be more appealing. The aim of this study was establish a rational way to delineate drugs in terms of their “forgiveness”, based on drugs PK/PD properties. A global sensitivity analysis has been performed to identify the most sensitive parameters to dose omissions. A Comparative Drug Forgiveness Index (CDFI), to rank the drugs in terms of their tolerability to non compliance, has been proposed. The index was applied to a number of calcium channel blockers, namely benidipine, nivaldipine, manidipine and felodipine. Using the calculation, benedipine and manidipine showed the best performance among those considered. This result is in accordance with what has been previously reported. The classification method developed here proved to be a powerful quantitative way to delineate drugs in terms of their forgiveness and provides a complementary decision rule for clinical and experimental studies.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".