Inspiration plus: baseline characteristics of the canadian registry for IPF patients on pirfenidone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive, irreversible and fatal disease. The primary aim of this national multicenter non-interventional study known as the INSPIRATION PLUS registry, is to describe the real world effectiveness and safety of pirfenidone and the clinical management practices in Canada. Methods: The patients included had a confirmed diagnosis in accordance with the 2011 international guidelines. Data are collected approximately every 3 to 6 months for a minimum of 2 years. The primary objective is to describe and assess the disease course and outcomes in pirfenidone-treated IPF patients in routine clinical practice. The drug utilization patterns will also be described. A validity assessment of the ATAQ-IPF questionnaire will be done compared to three validated but non-specific to IPF Quality of life measures. Results: Conclusion: The characteristics of this IPF population at the initiation of pirfenidone indicate that pirfenidone is being used in a wide spectrum of IPF patients in Canada. Follow up data will be presented at a later time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".