Primary biliary cirrhosis: Report of a focus study group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
o provide a forum for discussion in specific areas of liver disease, the Clinical Research Committee T of the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) conceived the Focus Study Group.The first Focus Study Group was organized by Nora V. Bergasa and Howard H. Worman.It was dedicated to primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and met on October 25th, 2003, during the AASLD annual meeting.The purpose of this symposium was to identify areas of research and to establish national and international collaborations to study PBC and its complications.The program was prepared from topics provided by investigators in the field, in response to questions posed by the organizers, and it was divided in three sections: pathogenesis, the study of fatigue, and treatment of PBC.An overview on the pathogenesis of PBC was presented by Dr. Eric M. Gershwin (University of California at Davis, CA)' and was followed by the presentations of invited speakers, all ofwhom are investigators in the field.In this report, abstracted presentations provided by the speakers and the salient points that evolved from the discussion sections are provided. Primary Biliary Cirrhosis and the Human (Andrew Mason)Working on the hypothesis that infectious/environmental agents trigger autoimmunity in genetically susceptible individuals, we have identified a retrovirus infection in patients with PBC.2,3This agent is referred to as the human betaretrovirus (HBRV) because of the genetic, morphological and antigenic relatedness to the mouse
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".