Characteristics, diagnostic and symptom profile of patients receiving tegaserod in routine clinical practice in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to assess the diagnostic and symptom profile of patients receiving tegaserod in routine clinical practice, and to identify their demographic characteristics, as well as the association between these characteristics and diagnosis. METHODS: This prospective, observational study collected data from physicians on the symptoms and/or diagnosis, age range and gender for patients to whom they prescribed tegaserod. Details of the physician characteristics included whether they were a family physician or a specialist, and the region of Canada in which their practice was located. RESULTS: A total of 500 patients were enrolled at 85 sites in Canada. The majority (85%) of the patients were enrolled by family physicians, and the remainder by community-based specialists. The patients were predominantly female (87%) and the highest percentages were in the 35-44 (23%) and 45-54 (25%) age groups. Nearly all patients (96%) were prescribed tegaserod on the basis of both symptoms and diagnosis. The most frequently reported symptoms were abdominal pain and/or discomfort (87%), bloating (80%) and constipation (75%). Most patients (57%) presented with all three of these symptoms. Constipation-predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS-C) was the most common diagnosis (55%), followed by IBS alternating between constipation and diarrhea (IBS-A) (23%). Based on this, 67% of patients were given tegaserod strictly according to the label, although it was appropriately prescribed to 87%. CONCLUSIONS: In Canada, tegaserod is prescribed to patients with symptoms of abdominal pain and/or discomfort, bloating and constipation. Most of them will also have a diagnosis of either IBS-C or IBS. It is generally being prescribed appropriately.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".