Guideline for the diagnosis and management of myelofibrosis
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
The guideline group regarding the diagnosis and management of myelofibrosis was selected to be representative of UK-based medical experts, together with a contribution from a single expert from the USA. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched systematically for publications in English from 1966 until August 2011 using a variety of key words. The writing group produced the draft guideline, which was subsequently revised by consensus of the members of the General Haematology and Haemato-oncology Task Forces of the British Committee for Standards in Haematology (BCSH). The guideline was then reviewed by a sounding board of UK haematologists, the BCSH and the British Society for Haematology Committee and comments incorporated where appropriate. The criteria used to state levels and grades of evidence are as outlined in the Procedure for Guidelines commissioned by the BCSH; the 'GRADE' system was used to score strength and quality of evidence. The objective of this guideline is to provide healthcare professionals with clear guidance on the investigation and management of primary myelofibrosis, as well as post-polycythaemic myelofibrosis (post-PV MF) and post-thrombocythemic myelofibrosis (post-ET MF) in both adult and paediatric patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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