MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997549007 · doi:10.1002/ana.21622

Sporadic inclusion body myositis: Pathogenic considerations

2009· review· en· W1997549007 on OpenAlexaff
George Karpati, Erin O’Ferrall

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Myopathies and Dermatomyositis
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion body myositisMyositisImmunopathologyPathogenesisMuscle diseaseDegenerative diseaseMedicineDiseaseDegeneration (medical)ImmunologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sporadic inclusion body myositis is the commonest acquired disease of skeletal muscles after 50 years of age, and as such it has commanded a great deal of attention of investigators over the past 25 years. As a result, a large amount of information has accumulated concerning its clinical profile, myopathology, and immunopathology. In the myopathology and immunopathology, there is general agreement that the characteristic features could be divided into a degenerative and an inflammatory group. However, there has been controversy about the possible role of these changes in the pathogenesis of muscle fiber damage. In particular, there is no agreement whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists between these two groups of changes, and if so, which is the primary one. In this brief overview, we examine the validity of the various controversial observations and critically review the justification for the two major hypotheses for the primary role of inflammation versus degeneration.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicInflammatory Myopathies and DermatomyositisFrench-language works237,207