MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916063242 · doi:10.1177/1203475418808764

Satisfaction and Awareness of Systemic Psoriasis Treatments: A National Survey Comparing Biologic and Nonbiologic Users

2019· article· en· W2916063242 on OpenAlexaffabout
Arvin Ighani, Ashley M. Yu, Vijay K. Sandhu, Benjamin Barankin, Morris F. Manolson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
FundersJanssen Biotech
KeywordsMedicinePsoriasisApremilastInternal medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND:: There is ongoing development of new therapies for psoriasis, including biologic and systemic agents such as interleukin-17, interleukin-23, and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors. The development of these agents has changed the landscape of psoriasis treatment options. OBJECTIVE:: The objective of this study was to characterize the impact of newer biologic and systemic agents approved by June 2016 on patient outcomes. We sought to evaluate and compare biologic users and nonbiologic systemic users with respect to their treatment awareness and satisfaction. METHODS:: We conducted a national Canadian survey from July to September 2016 on adult patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using biologic agents or nonbiologic systemic agents as their current primary treatment modality. Patients were asked to evaluate their overall satisfaction with their treatment agent and their awareness of other treatment options. Responses from biologic and nonbiologic systemic users were compared. RESULTS:: Overall, 343 participants were included (biologic users: n = 218; nonbiologic users: n = 125). Treatment satisfaction: Biologic users had a higher overall satisfaction score than nonbiologic users ( P < .001). Among nonbiologic agents, apremilast (62%) was associated with the highest satisfaction proportion. Among biologic agents, ustekinumab (77%) and adalimumab (72%) were associated with the highest proportions of satisfaction. With respect to treatment awareness, 30% of nonbiologic patients did not have enough information to form an opinion about biologics. CONCLUSIONS:: This study demonstrates the greater treatment satisfaction of biologic users compared with nonbiologic users for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Given that nearly one-third of nonbiologic users did not have enough information to form an opinion about biologic agents, physicians may consider counselling these patients on the use of biologic agents for psoriasis management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisFrench-language works237,207