MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PWE-124 Daily aspirin 300mg: how much do patients take? drug accountability for the first 5 years of the aspect study

2017· article· en· W2742594813 on OpenAlexaff
Janusz Jankowski, Sharon Love, Gavin Reilly, John de Caestecker, Stephen Attwood, Peter J. Watson, Hugh Barr, Yeng Ang, Adelyn Wise, Pradeep Bhandari, S. Sanders, Rebecca Harrison, Ian Penman, Colin Rodgers, Cathryn Edwards, Michael Gibbons, Nicholas Church, Kuladeepa Ananda Vaidya, James Neale, Krish Ragunath, David L. Morris, D Johnston, Paul Moayyedi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspirinMedicineDrugAccountabilityComputer scienceInternal medicinePharmacologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction We prescribe medicines to patients but the key factor determining efficacy is the dose taken. Recent evidence suggests compliance with aspirin therapy is vital to ensuring its chemoprevention efficacy. Therefore we look at the patient’s compliance with aspirin in a large trial. Method In the 2 × 2 factorial AspECT study, Barrett’s patients were randomised to take 300 mg Aspirin daily or no aspirin and to take 20 mg or 80 mg of PPI. This paper describes for the first 5 years after randomisation the aspirin taking pattern of those prescribed aspirin. Logistic regression analysis was used to consider what factors affected compliance. Results Of the 1116 patients randomised to aspirin, 803 (72%; 95% CI 69.2, 74.5) took aspirin for 5 years or until discontinuation related to the trial. Of the 803, 514 took aspirin at a dose of 300 mg and 77 took a lower dose for 5 years without interruption (150 mg (38), 75 mg (24), 150 mg later reducing to 75 mg (15)). The remaining 212/803 had interruptions as permitted in the protocol or discontinued due to trial related reasons (e.g. trial endpoints or protocol deviations). There was no evidence to suggest that gender, dose of PPI, age, ethnicity or length of Barrett’s predicted 5 year compliance. Conclusion Conclusion: In AspECT, 72% of patients were compliant with aspirin for 5 years or until discontinuation related to the trial. We did not discover any features predicting compliance. However since all patients were randomised to PPI, it does indicate longer term aspirin chemoprevention may be limited in over a quarter of the reflux population. Our thanks to the patients and the sites. The trial is sponsored by the University of Oxford with grant funding from CR-UK (A4584) and support from the Investigator-Sponsored Study Program of AstraZeneca Trial management and statistics provided by OCTO (OCTRU) and CSM Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207