Nitritoid reactions: case reports, review, and recommendations for management.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed nitritoid reactions, which are a well recognized side effect of chrysotherapy that occur in roughly 5% of patients taking gold sodium thiomalate (GST). METHODS: Between January 1996 and January 2000, 8 patients followed in our gold monitoring program at Mary Pack Arthritis Centre experienced nitritoid reactions observed by the clinic nurse. We undertook a chart review to determine the risk factors, timing, course, and outcome of nitritoid reactions. RESULTS: Patients' ages ranged from 36 to 69 years, and 7 of 8 were women. Duration of gold therapy prior to nitritoid reactions ranged from 13 months to 13 years. Seven had previously had mucocutaneous reactions, and one experienced gold dermatitis following a nitritoid reaction. Two of 8 patients were taking angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor agents. Seven reactions were classified as mild, and one was a severe reaction with hypotension, syncope, and angina. CONCLUSIONS: Management includes a high index of suspicion in patients experiencing nausea, flushing, or dizziness following gold injections, switching from GST to gold sodium aurothioglucose, injection in the recumbent position, and observation for 20 minutes after injections in individual patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".