Introduction. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic and chronic autoimmune disease involving the joints disorder as the main manifestations. Methotrexate (MTX) is currently still the drug of choice for RA treatment due to the good clinical response. However, there was a case reported by the American Geriatric Society in 2015 regarding the presence of reversible dementia after treatment with low-dose oral methotrexate. This study aimed to identify the effect of MTX treatment on cognitive disorder in RA patients. Methods. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023414937). A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline Embase database, Scopus, CENTRAL to identify cohort observational studies, case controls, and randomized control trial (RCT) studies, evaluating the effect of methotrexate therapy on cognitive function disorder in RA patients. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS Scale) was used to analyze the quality of existing observational studies and The COCHRANE was used to analyze the RCT studies which included in the journals reviewed. Results. There were 4 observational studies that met the criteria, including 2 case control studies and 2 cohort studies. Pooling was carried out in two different types of studies. The OR was 0.81 (95%CI 0.4 – 1.68) in the case control studies group, whereas the RR was 0.88 (95% CI 0 .6 – 1.3) in the cohort studies group. The heterogeneity of each type of case-control studies and cohort studies were I2 92% (p-value277% (p-value Conclusion. Methotrexate therapy has not been proven to have an effect on cognitive disorder in RA patients either as a protective factor or as a risk factor.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. Doctors have greater risk of acquiring COVID-19 due to occupational exposure. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is an essential factor in reducing COVID-19 transmission. We aimed to evaluate the behavior changes of PPE usage among doctors in Indonesia before and after getting COVID-19 infection in early pandemic. Methods. This was a descriptive online survey with cross-sectional design. This survey was conducted from October-December 2020 among Indonesian doctors who were COVID-19 survivors. Results. A total of 389 doctors who survived COVID-19 infection across Indonesia were included in the final analysis. Most participants were general practitioners and residents (69.2%) with a median age of 40 (22-28) years. After being infected, there was an improvement in the use of N95 respirator masks in isolation rooms (always: 80.9% from 70.2%; sometimes: 13.2% from 15.8%). An improvement in the use of other PPE before and after being infected with COVID-19 was also shown by the use of other PPE such as headcap (93.9% from 83.3%), face shield (90.4% from 83.3%), goggles (70.2% from 62.3%), gown (61.4% from 53.6%), hazmat suit (88.6% from 81.6%), boots (82.5% from 71.1%), and gloves (91.3% from 86.8%). Similar results were also shown in the use of PPE in other non-isolation rooms. Conclusion. After recovering from COVID-19 infection, these doctors showed an increase usage of adequate PPE both while on duty in isolation and non-isolation rooms.
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 | 0.015 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".