MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983779443 · doi:10.1002/hep.21405

Sclerosing cholangitis: A focus on secondary causes

2006· review· en· W1983779443 on OpenAlexaff
Rupert Abdalian, Jenny Heathcote

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory Diseases
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus (optics)Primary sclerosing cholangitisMedicineGastroenterologyInternal medicinePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Secondary sclerosing cholangitis (SSC) is a disease that is morphologically similar to primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) but that originates from a known pathological process. Its clinical and cholangiographic features may mimic PSC, yet its natural history may be more favorable if recognition is prompt and appropriate therapy is introduced. Thus, the diagnosis of PSC requires the exclusion of secondary causes of sclerosing cholangitis and recognition of associated conditions that may potentially imitate its classic cholangiographic features. Well-described causes of SSC include intraductal stone disease, surgical or blunt abdominal trauma, intra-arterial chemotherapy, and recurrent pancreatitis. However, a wide variety of other associations have been reported recently, including autoimmune pancreatitis, portal biliopathy, eosinophillic and/or mast cell cholangitis, hepatic inflammatory pseudotumor, recurrent pyogenic cholangitis, primary immune deficiency, and AIDS-related cholangiopathy. This article offers a comprehensive review of SSC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations232
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicIgG4-Related and Inflammatory DiseasesFrench-language works237,207