Liver involvement in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia: consensus recommendations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY PURPOSE: To formulate recommendations about clinical management of liver involvement in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT), using a formal consensus development process. CONSENSUS PROCESS: A nominal group technique was used. A list of main clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic issues about liver involvement in HHT was generated by the organizing committee. Panel members then scored their agreement with each statement; the median score, and standard deviation for each statement were determined for each of the three successive panel rounds. These consensus statements formed the basis for recommendations graded with the strength and quality of supporting evidence. RECOMMENDATION STATEMENTS: Doppler US is sufficiently accurate and suitable for first-line imaging of the liver in the general HHT population. Liver biopsy in any patient with proven or suspected HHT should be avoided. Liver involvement in HHT is generally asymptomatic; in the minority of patients where it is symptomatic, morbidity and mortality can be substantial. The prevalence of focal nodular hyperplasia is much higher in patients with liver involvement by HHT than in the general population. Invasive therapies for liver involvement by HHT (namely liver transplantation) should be considered only in patients who have failed to respond to intensive medical therapy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it