Network Meta-analysis of Treatments for Chronic Plaque Psoriasis in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psoriasis affects approximately 500,000 Canadians. Eight treatments are currently licensed for chronic plaque psoriasis in Canada. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of systemic treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis for the outcome > 75% reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) using network meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched up until October 15, 2013, for phase III clinical trials. A consistency model based on a random-effects bayesian statistical framework was used to compare the rates of > 75% PASI reduction across trials. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included in the network analysis. Infliximab had significantly greater odds of producing > 75% reduction in the PASI compared to all treatments. All treatments conferred greater odds of > 75% PASI reduction compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: Although infliximab had the highest efficacy relative to other systemic treatments for psoriasis, adverse effects, cost, and patient preferences should also be considered when deciding on treatment.
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 | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".