MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Results of a Delphi Panel to Address Management of Gastrointestinal Side Effects Observed with Use of Delayed-release Dimethyl Fumarate (P3.242)

2015· article· en· W908978350 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodDelphiMedicineInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into gastrointestinal (GI) events associated with delayed-release dimethyl fumarate (DMF) from clinicians who treat patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), and to obtain consensus on effective management strategies and appropriate expectations for patients with GI events. BACKGROUND: Delayed-release DMF (240 mg twice daily) is approved for treatment of relapsing forms of MS (USA, Australia) or relapsing-remitting MS (Canada, EU). In clinical trials, events associated with GI tolerability (nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea) were more common in patients treated with delayed-release DMF compared with placebo-treated patients. The Delphi method (a consensus-building technique) was initiated in the US and Canada to obtain information about managing these side effects in a real-world setting. DESIGN/METHODS: A steering committee designed and conducted surveys of clinicians in the US and Canada whose MS patients receive treatment with delayed-release DMF. Two rounds of questionnaires were developed that include questions relating to clinician experience with treatment-associated GI events. Results from the first questionnaire were used to develop the second questionnaire and were provided along with the second questionnaire in an effort to obtain consensus on the management of each specific GI event. RESULTS: Sixty-four respondents completed the first round questionnaire. Most (63/64) indicated that 蠅1 of their patients had experienced GI side effects (typically <20[percnt] of patients). Most strategies attempted to manage the GI side effects, including food-based strategies, prescription medications, and/or nonprescription medications were reported as effective some of the time. The most frequently used strategies were included in the second round questionnaire to obtain consensus (蠅70[percnt] agreement) regarding their potential effectiveness. The final results of the Delphi process will be presented. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies identified by clinicians to manage GI events associated with delayed-release DMF will be important in clinical practice to improve tolerability and compliance. Study Supported by: Biogen Idec Inc.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it