MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W144004316 · doi:10.1155/2004/670161

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Use of Infliximab in Crohn's Disease

2004· article· en· W144004316 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Remo Panaccione, Richard N. Fedorak, Guy Anmais, Çharles N. Bernstein, Alain Bitton, Ken Croitoru, Robert Enns, Brian G. Feagan, Marty Fishman, Gordon R. Greenberg, Anne M. Griffiths, John K. Marshall, Imran Rasul, Daniel Sadowski, Ernest G. Seidman, Hillary Steinhart, Lloyd R. Sutherland, Eric Walli, Gary Wild, Chadwick Williams, Mary Zachos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsCredit Valley HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcMaster UniversityUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityUniversity of ManitobaWestern UniversityHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsInfliximabMedicineCrohn's diseaseInternal medicineGastroenterologyDiseaseMaintenance therapyClinical PracticeInflammatory bowel diseaseFamily medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These guidelines are presented as a follow-up to the original Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guidelines: The use of infliximab in Crohn's disease, published in the Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology (1). The original guidelines represented publications between 1998 and 2000. The current guidelines have been updated to reflect knowledge gained from two pivotal randomized clinical trails, with the use of infliximab in the maintenance of inflammatory Crohn's disease in remission (2) and in the maintenance of fistulous Crohn's disease in remission (3).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207