Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s Drug Agency (CDA-AMC) recommends that Spevigo should be reimbursed by public drug plans for the treatment of generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) in adults and pediatric patients 12 years of age and older and weighing at least 40 kg if certain conditions are met. Spevigo should only be covered to treat adults and pediatric patients aged 12 years and older, weighing at least 40 kg, and living with GPP. Spevigo should be reimbursed for both the acute treatment of GPP flares and for the prevention of GPP flares for patients with a history of flares according to the European Rare and Severe Psoriasis Expert Network (ERASPEN) criteria. Spevigo should only be reimbursed if prescribed by clinicians (dermatologists or rheumatologists) with expertise in managing GPP and other types of psoriasis. For the prevention of flares, the initial authorization should be for 6 months of treatment. For continued renewal of Spevigo for the prevention of flares, the severity of GPP as measured by the generalized pustular psoriasis physician global assessment (GPPGA) total score at initiation should be maintained (not worsen), patient should experience fewer flares compared to baseline, and the reduction in the number of flares should be sustained. Spevigo should only be reimbursed if there is a reduction in drug price.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".