Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine if early initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy affects the need for dose escalation. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients receiving infliximab therapy for Crohn's disease(CD) at two outpatient gastroenterology clinics during July 2009 to October 2010. All patients included in the study were biologic agent na?ve and had moderate to severe CD(Harvey Bradshaw index 8). Patients were divided into groups based on length of time between diagnosis to therapy initiation and concurrent immunosuppressant therapy. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare the time to dose escalation for the four groups. RESULTS: There were 68 patients,51% female and 49% male,with an average age at diagnosis of 24.7 ± 11.9 years. The average age at infliximab initiation was 34.8 ± 14.8 years. Of the 68 patients,19% initiated inflixiamb within 2 years of diagnosis,and 51% had concurrent immunosuppressant therapy at the time of therapy initiation. Fifty percent of patients required dose escalation and the median time from therapy initiation to dose escalation was 10 mo(interquartile range: 5.3-14.8). There was a statistically significant higher probability of requiring dose esclataion in patients who initiated biologic therapy within 2 years of diagnosis,without concurrent immunosuppressant therapy(P 0.01). CONCLUSION: Those who receive infliximab within 2 years of CD diagnosis require more intense immunosuppressant therapy than those who received infliximab later.
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".