MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036811203 · doi:10.1002/hep.20169

Screening in liver disease: Report of an AASLD clinical workshop

2004· review· en· W2036811203 on OpenAlexaff
Paul C. Adams, Michael J.P. Arthur, Thomas Boyer, Laurie D. DeLeve, Adrian M. Di Bisceglie, Mark A. Hall, Theodore R. Levin, Dawn Provenzale, Leonard B. Seeff

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLiver diseaseInternal medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report summarizes an AASLD Clinical Workshop that was presented at Digestive Diseases Week 2003 on screening in liver diseases. As newer diagnostic tests become available, many liver diseases and complications of liver disease can be detected at an early asymptomatic stage. In many cases, early detection can lead to earlier treatment and an improved outcome. However, screening for liver diseases in asymptomatic persons has the potential for adverse consequences, including discrimination and stigmatization. The cost of screening programs is significant, and access to screening tests varies in different countries. Future screening programs require careful planning and implementation to balance the benefits, risks, and cost-effectiveness. This review outlines the concepts of screening and their application to a broad range of liver diseases.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations58
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207