Etanercept Patient Assistance Program: Another Data Source for Epidemiological Studies?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patient assistance programs (PAP) have been established for biologic disease modifying therapies such as etanercept to improve patient knowledge and compliance and provide a means for follow-up.The information collected through these programs is a potential data source to determine patient characteristics, patient outcomes, treatment adherence and reimbursement practices of individuals prescribed biologic disease modifying therapies.Objective: To describe the population enrolled in the Enliven ® Services Patient Assistance Program and to determine one-year retention rates.Methods: A retrospective review of a Canadian cohort of patients enrolled in an etanercept PAP diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was conducted.Demographic and utilization information was collected for all subjects enrolled in the period between 2000 and 2007.One-year retention rates were also calculated from the data collected.Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the data.Results: 14,335 subjects prescribed etanercept were enrolled in Enliven ® .Average age at time of enrollment was 53 years.Three-quarters of subjects were female and four-fifths were English speaking.The largest percentage
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 | 0.050 | 0.153 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".