Ancillary Therapy and Supportive Care of Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Project on Criteria for Clinical Trials in Chronic Graft-versus-Host Disease: V. Ancillary Therapy and Supportive Care Working Group Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ancillary Therapy and Supportive Care Working Group had 3 goals: (1) to establish guidelines for ancillary therapy and supportive care in chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), including treatment for symptoms and recommendations for patient education, preventive measures, and appropriate follow-up; (2) to provide guidelines for the prevention and management of infections and other common complications of treatment for chronic GVHD; and (3) to highlight the areas with the greatest need for clinical research. The definition of "ancillary therapy and supportive care" embraces the most frequent immunosuppressive or anti-inflammatory interventions used with topical intent and any other interventions directed at organ-specific control of symptoms or complications resulting from GVHD and its therapy. Also included in the definition are educational, preventive, and psychosocial interventions with this same objective. Recommendations are organized according to the strength and quality of evidence supporting them and cover the most commonly involved organs, including the skin, mouth, female genital tract, eyes, gastrointestinal tract, and lungs. Recommendations are provided for prevention of infections, osteoporosis, and steroid myopathy and management of neurocognitive and psychosocial adverse effects related to chronic GVHD. Optimal care of patients with chronic GVHD often requires a multidisciplinary approach.
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 | 0.188 | 0.181 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".