Presentation by Ms. Connie Freeman, Regional Director for Eastern and Southern Africa, Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) : 2002 National Policy Research Conference, Ottawa (ON), Oct. 24, 2002
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of tuberculosis should be as short and as simple as possible in order to improve patient compliance; and combinations of at least three drugs should be used in order to kill the different populations of mycobacteria and to avoid development of drug resistance.--In a controlled multicentre study two regimens were compared in 93 patients with newly-diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis: 1) Six-month therapy (47 cases): Daily rifampicin and isoniazid, supplemented with pyrazinamide for the first 2 months. A tablet with a fixed combination of 120 mg rifampicin, 50 mg isoniazid and 300 mg pyrazinamide (Rifater) was used. 2) Present Swiss standard therapy (46 cases): Daily rifampicin, isoniazid and ethambutol for 2 months followed by rifampicin and isoniazid for 7 months.--The time-course of culture negativation and the frequency of adverse events were similar in the two groups. During a follow-up period of at least two years only one relapse was observed in the six-month regimen, 3 months after completion of treatment. This was one of three patients with pretreatment resistance to isoniazid. Nevertheless, two of them were cured with the six-month regimen containing Rifater.--Patient compliance, assessed during outpatient treatment by detecting isoniazid metabolites in the urine, was very good (93% of tests were positive in each group).--These results with a follow-up of more than 2 years, indicate that short-course therapy of 6 months duration with the fixed combination tablet may be recommended as treatment of choice in pulmonary tuberculosis except in cases of isoniazid resistance and other special situations (i.e. large cavitations, large number of viable bacilli).
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".