MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036921980 · doi:10.7224/1537-2073-7.4.132

Injection-Site Pain in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis: Interferon Beta-1b Versus Interferon Beta-1a

2005· article· en· W2036921980 on OpenAlexaff
Colleen Harris, Kathy Billisberger, Lori Tillotson, Sharon Peters, Carol Pederson, Melodie Becker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of MS Care · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterferonMultiple sclerosisVisual analogue scaleSubcutaneous injectionInterferon beta-1aInjection siteBETA (programming language)Interferon betaInterferon beta-1bInternal medicineAnesthesiaImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single-center, open-label, comparative pilot study was undertaken to assess injection-site pain associated with 10 consecutive subcutaneous injections of interferon beta-1b 250 μg every other day or interferon beta-1a 44 μg three times weekly in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Injection-site pain was assessed by the patients with a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) score. Recordings were made before each injection and at 10 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours postinjection. Ten patients were enrolled in each treatment group. The proportion of injections associated with no pain or no increase in pain at 1 hour postinjection was higher with interferon beta-1b (47%) than with interferon beta-1a (27%). Mean pain severity was also less intense with interferon beta-1b than with interferon beta-1a. Differences in VAS scores were seen immediately after injection (1.04 versus 3.14 cm, respectively) and at 10 minutes (0.40 versus 1.70 cm) and 1 hour (0.33 versus 1.50 cm) postinjection. These findings indicate that subcutaneous injection with interferon beta-1b is associated with a lower incidence and severity of pain than subcutaneous injection with interferon beta-1a in patients with MS. The results should assist MS nurses and physicians in supporting patients to make an informed choice regarding potential side effects when deciding on an appropriate disease-modifying therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of MS CareSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207