MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158909549 · doi:10.1097/rhu.0000000000001744

An Initiative to Improve Timely Glucocorticoid Tapering in Vasculitis

2021· article· en· W3158909549 on OpenAlexaff
Arielle Mendel, Daniel B. Ennis, Shirley Lake, Simon Carette, Christian Pagnoux

Bibliographic record

VenueJCR Journal of Clinical Rheumatology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalVancouver General HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill University Health CentreMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTaperingVasculitisPrednisoneInternal medicineIntervention (counseling)SurgeryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: High-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) are required in the initial treatment of systemic vasculitis. However, slow or delayed tapering can lead to unnecessary GC exposure and toxicity. In this quality improvement initiative, we aimed to increase appropriate GC tapering among newly referred patients awaiting specialty consultation at a tertiary vasculitis clinic. METHODS: For each patient referred for anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) or large vessel vasculitis (LVV), recommendation-based GC tapering suggestions were faxed to referring physicians. To maximize uptake, the intervention format was modified according to feedback from referring physicians' offices. The proportion of new patients presenting to their first appointment who (1) had started to taper GCs, (2) were taking their target GC dose according to recommendations, (3) experienced a vasculitis flare during tapering were compared before (July 2017-January 2019) and after (February-October 2019) the intervention. RESULTS: Among 169 consecutive patients referred for AAV or LVV, the proportion who had started to taper GCs by their first visit increased from 84 of 117 (72%) preintervention to 49 of 52 (94%) postintervention (p < 0.01). Mean daily prednisone dose at first visit decreased from 29.9 (SD, 18) mg to 21.7 (SD, 14) mg (p < 0.01). However, the proportion who were ultimately taking "target" GC doses at their first visit did not significantly increase (72% vs. 77%). Disease flares during tapering were similar before and after the intervention (9% vs. 12%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AAV and LVV had increased GC tapering and lower GC doses at first visit following a preappointment intervention. Further strategies are needed to improve timely GC tapering in vasculitis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCR Journal of Clinical RheumatologySame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207