MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999204299 · doi:10.1159/000351233

Current Status of Implementation of Self-Administration Training in Various Regions of Europe, Canada and the USA in the Management of Hereditary Angioedema

2013· article· en· W1999204299 on OpenAlexaffabout
Teresa Caballero, Anna Sala, Mauro Cancian, Timothy Craig, Sergio Neri, Paul K. Keith, Isabelle Boccon‐Gibod, Claire Bethune, Konrad Bork

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Immunology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHereditary angioedemaAdministration (probate law)MedicineSelf-administrationIntervention (counseling)NursingPolitical sciencePharmacologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results from a 16-question survey about self-administration of hereditary angioedema (HAE) therapy, administered in Europe, Canada and the USA, were used to guide discussion at an international HAE expert meeting. The aim was to capture information about current practice in self-administered HAE therapy in these countries, including self-administration training, the key benefits of switching to self-administration, the barriers to self-administration and trends in self-administration. Overall, switching to self-administration therapy is looked upon favourably from both patient and clinician perspectives by virtue of the potential improvement in quality of life arising from optimisation of therapy and early intervention. The recent changes to product licences allowing self-administration provide additional options for the management of HAE.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and ImmunologySame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207