MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145914167 · doi:10.1002/ibd.20688

Use of combination therapy in IBD

2008· article· en· W2145914167 on OpenAlexaff
Gilaad G. Kaplan, Remo Panaccione

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past 2 decades many different drugs have been shown to be effective in the medical management of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). The armamentarium of medications has evolved from 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) and corticosteroid preparations to immunomodulators and, more recently, biologicals targeting specific components of the immune cascade. As new medications are introduced monotherapy is usually the rule as physicians become comfortable with the balance between efficacy and toxicity. Combining therapies may lead to increased efficacy and even reduce or limit toxicity. An increase in toxicity by combining therapies will remain a realistic concern. By combining different medications clinicians have become more sophisticated in the way the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are treated. This chapter will explore the advantages and disadvantages associated with combining steroids, azathioprine (AZA), 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP), methotrexate (MTX), infliximab, 5-ASA preparations, and antibiotics in the treatment of CD and UC. Although steroids have been shown to be an effective agent in inducing remission in patients with moderate to severe CD and UC, long-term monotherapy with prednisone is undesirable due to short- and long-term toxicity. Immunomodulators (AZA, 6-MP, and MTX) are used as steroid-sparing agents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207