Impact of Azithromycin on Pregnancy Prolongationin in Women at Risk of Preterm Labor: A Time-to-Event Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health utility (HU) scores play an essential role in pharmacoeconomic analyses. Routine clinical administration of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) can allow for HU and health related quality of life (HRQOL) assessments in the real-world setting. OBJECTIVES: The primary goals of this study were to evaluate whether patients were willing to complete the EQ-5D instrument on a routine basis and which clinical or demographic factors influence this willingness. METHODS: 618 adult cancer survivors across multiple cancer disease sites at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre completed an acceptability survey after completing the EQ-5D instrument. RESULTS: The mean (SD) EQ-5D score was 0.81 (0.15). Among those surveyed, 88% reported that the EQ-5D was easy to complete. 91% took under 5 minutes and 88% were satisfied with its length. 85% were satisfied with the types of questions asked on the EQ-5D. Importantly, 92% reported that they would complete the EQ-5D, even if it were used solely for research purposes; 73% agreed with the notion of completing it regularly at their clinic visits. Patients with lower EQ-5D scores (p=0.0006), and non-Caucasians (p=0.0024; 60% willing) were less willing to complete the instrument on a regular basis. Curability of tumour, disease site, age, and gender did not influence willingness. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of cancer patients across disease sites are willing to complete the EQ-5D instrument regularly, even if it were solely for research purposes, but up to 39% declined participation in the first place.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".