Lyme Disease Patient Outcomes and Experiences; A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lyme disease is a vector-borne illness caused by Borrelia spp. bacterium spread by ticks to humans and other mammals. Despite being prevalent in many regions of the world, there remains considerable uncertainty surrounding many aspects of the disease, and consensus on the most appropriate and effective means of treating the illness remains to be achieved. Recommendations published by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS), the primary guidelines followed by health care professionals treating Lyme disease, diverge in many of their key recommendations, including treatment duration. Given this lack of consensus, surprisingly little research has been conducted on patient outcomes following different treatment approaches. In this study, patient outcomes were evaluated from a cohort of 210 Canadian Lyme disease patients seeking treatment at one US Lyme disease clinic following a treatment regimen conforming to the ILADS treatment guidelines. It was found that the majority of Lyme disease patients at the clinic responded positively to treatment and a significant (p < 0.05) decrease in symptoms was observed over time. This study, along with related studies, may help to guide physicians to provide their patients with the most effective care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".