A Canadian vasculitis patient-driven survey to highlight which prednisone-related side effects matter the most
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Although management of vasculitis has evolved over the last decades, glucocorticoids (GC) have remained the cornerstone of treatment. The side effects (SE) of GC are well known by the clinicians; their importance for patients with vasculitis has not been investigated as extensively as in other rheumatological conditions. METHODS: An online questionnaire surveyed between April 29th. to July 31st, 2022 with Vasculitis Foundation Canada about the patient experience and SE of prednisone. The survey included 5 questions about prednisone dose and duration, 21 about specific SE (with a rating of 1-10, and one question each on worst prednisone, and worst vasculitis, SE), and four other questions about knowledge and perception of possible alternatives to prednisone (namely, avacopan). RESULTS: A total of 97 patients (53 GPA/MPA, 44 other vasculitides) completed the survey. Their mean duration of GC use was 62.7±83.7 months, and 49.5% of patients were still on GC (daily dose, 8.4±6.2mg). All the patients reported ≥1 GC-related SE, and 67.0% reported ≥11/19 pre-specified SE of interest. Among ranked SEs, acne was the lowest score, whereas moon face/torso hump had the highest score, just above weight gain, insomnia and decreased quality of life. Around half of the GPA/MPA patients and one-third of the others had heard about avacopan, and 68% of patients (similarly in both groups) stated they would prefer being the first to take a very new medication, such as avacopan, instead of prednisone. CONCLUSIONS: Ranking given to some GC-related SEs may differ between patients and physicians. GC toxicity/SE indexes should reflect this difference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".