Adherence to Pancreatic Enzyme Supplementation: In Adolescents with Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Levels of adherence to pancreatic enzyme supplementation were investigated in Atlantic Canada adolescents with cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: Participants were recruited from CF clinics at the Izaak Walton Killam Health Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and the Janeway Children's Health & Rehabilitation Centre in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. Self-report questionnaires were mailed to potential participants (n=51) by clinic staff and completed surveys (n=9) were mailed to the principal investigator. RESULTS: Nine adolescents (mean age 15.2 ± 1.9 years) participated in the study. The adherence survey indicated that the majority perceived themselves to be adherent to taking enzymes with meals (67%), but only 44% perceived themselves to be adherent to taking enzymes with snacks. Recorded amounts of enzymes, taken over three days, indicated that 67% of participants were actually adherent to taking enzymes with meals and 56% with snacks. Including those who correctly predicted non-adherence, 56% and 44% of participants accurately predicted their adherence to taking enzymes with meals and snacks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence rates in the literature vary because of differences in definition and measurement. In the CF population, adherence has been shown to have a positive effect on quality of life. Results for this small group of patients suggest that Atlantic Canada adolescents with CF are able to estimate correctly their adherence to taking pancreatic enzymes, but definite conclusions cannot be made because of the small number of respondents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".