Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: When the antithyroid drugs were discovered in the early 1940s, they were immediately recognized as a revolutionary new treatment for hyperthyroidism. Although much has been learned about their mechanism of action and clinical utility, they continue to be used today in much the same way as they have been since their introduction. Summary: In 1995, Dr. Clark Sawin gave an address on the history of antithyroid drug development at the 11th International Thyroid Congress in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. In his review, Dr. Sawin recounted the original observations by Drs. Julia and Cosmo Mackenzie and Curt Richter at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and how their work ultimately led to Dr. Edwin (Ted) B. Astwood's seminal 1943 report on the use of thiourea and thiouracil in the Journal of the American Medical Association. He also described the development of propylthiouracil and methimazole as less toxic alternatives. He concluded his remarks by noting the often-serendipitous pathway of drug development and the role of pharmaceutical companies in the process. Conclusions: Antithyroid drugs remain a cornerstone of thyroid therapeutics. It is informative to review the process by which they came into use, as this is a seminal part of the history of thyroid disease in the 20th century. This knowledge may also spark additional research leading to new pharmacotherapies for patients with hyperthyroidism.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 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".