Patients’ Preference of Valacyclovir Once-Daily Suppressive Therapy Versus Twice-Daily Episodic Therapy for Recurrent Genital Herpes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Background Valacyclovir is effective for suppressive and episodic treatment of recurrent genital herpes. Few data on patients’ treatment strategy preferences are available. Goal The goal was to assess patients’ preference, satisfaction, and quality of life with suppressive versus episodic treatment of recurrent genital herpes. Study Design This was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, two-arm, crossover 48-week study involving 225 patients with genital herpes. Results Suppressive valacyclovir therapy was preferred to episodic valacyclovir treatment by 72% of patients (P < 0.001). Overall treatment satisfaction and quality of life were significantly greater during suppressive therapy (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). The risk of recurrence during the first 24 weeks was reduced by 78% with suppressive therapy (P < 0.001). Significantly fewer patients experienced recurrences during suppressive treatment than with episodic treatment (P < 0.001). Valacyclovir was well tolerated. Conclusions Suppressive valacyclovir was preferred to episodic therapy by most patients. Suppressive therapy was associated with increased treatment satisfaction, and decreased risk and lower frequency of recurrences. A study of patients with genital herpes showed that suppressive valacyclovir was preferred to episodic therapy. Suppressive therapy was associated with increased treatment satisfaction and decreased risk and frequency of recurrences.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it