MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emerging oral therapies for multiple sclerosis

2007· review· en· W2103294049 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Practice · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMerck KGaA
KeywordsMedicineMultiple sclerosisIntensive care medicineDiseaseInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Current disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) have positively affected the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS); however, the requirement for long-term injections imposes a burden on patients and may lead to reduced adherence in some cases. Furthermore, not all patients respond adequately to current DMDs, suggesting that certain patients require different therapeutic approaches. Therefore, alternative MS treatments with less invasive routes of administration and new modes of action are needed to expand the current treatment repertoire, increase patient satisfaction and adherence, and thereby improve efficacy. DISCUSSION: This review discusses the current unmet need for an orally administered treatment for RRMS, including potential benefits of this route of administration, and implications for improved treatment outcomes. Oral drugs that are currently in Phase II/III clinical development are discussed.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.125
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.125
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.600
GPT teacher head0.624
Teacher spread0.024 · 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