Traditional and Short Course Treatment for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis: A Comparative Study in National Referral Centers.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is difficult, expensive, and requires prolonged periods of time. Recent studies recommended short-course therapy (shorter regimen) for 9 months to one year. This study aimed to evaluate the response of the short-course therapy compared with traditional treatment in MDR-TB patients. Materials and Methods: From all 94 referred MDR-TB cases, 48 patients were included in this study. Shorter regimen consisted of Moxifloxacin, Prothionamide, Amikacin, Clofazimine, Linezolid, Ethambutol, Pyrazinamide, and Cycloserine, and longer regimens consisted of the mentioned drugs, except Clofazimine and Linezolid, were prescribed randomly: in equal (24 in each group). The patients were monitored and evaluated for any complications and were followed for five years for relapse. Results: The median age was 39 years. The median interval for smear conversion was 30 days (20- 58 days) and was shorter in the short-course group (36 vs. 49 days). Also, the mean interval of sputum culture conversion in the shorter group and standard was 32 and 56 days, respectively, which is not related to the outcome of treatment. Eight of twelve patients who developed severe adverse effects were in shorter regimen. There was no difference between the two groups for the outcome of TB treatment. There is no relation between the outcome and other factors. None of them relapsed after three years following the end of the treatment. Conclusion: Shorter treatment can increase the cure rate and cooperation and adherence of the patients. It would be better to consider a shorter regimen in the national TB program for strengthening favorable treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".