MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967279872 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.10023

Guidelines on the management of renal cyst disease

2010· article· en· W1967279872 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Thomas F. Whelan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIIfRadiologyCystRandomized controlled trialMagnetic resonance imagingLesionConservative managementDiseaseSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are no randomized controlled trials with regards to follow-up or management of cystic renal masses, as such, the recommendations are primarily expert opinion. At this time, category I and II renal cysts, do not require further imaging or follow-up. Patients in Category IIF, because of the approximate 5% malignant risk, do require periodic imaging. (There is no consensus or evidence based interval determined for follow-up imaging.) Combination of ultrasound and MRI should be considered as follow-up for Bosniak IIF and reduces the lifetime radiation dose (once the lesion has been characterized by triphasic CT scan) in patients younger than 50 years. For Category III (50% malignant risk) and category IV (75% to 90% malignant risk), surgical excision is recommended.9–13 (Level 3 evidence, Grade B recommendation). Although MRI may add further information, it should be used as an adjunct to CT scans in difficult cases (Level 4 evidence, Grade C recommendation).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.012

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations78
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207