Posttransplant monitoring of de novo human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies in kidney transplantation
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
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the evidence supporting the negative impact of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) in renal transplantation and to describe the natural history associated with the development of dnDSA. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have increased our appreciation of the risk factors that predispose to dnDSA while illuminating how these risk factors may relate to the pathophysiology underlying its development. In addition, details regarding the natural history of dnDSA are now available in the context of the different clinical pathologic phenotypes that occur in the patients in whom it develops. Common pitfalls in defining and monitoring dnDSA, when understood, may provide some explanation for the heterogeneity in published studies. SUMMARY: Recognizing that dnDSA is a major cause of late graft loss, and, more importantly, is detectable in many cases long before dysfunction or graft loss occurs, identifies an opportunity to intervene and change the outcome for the patient.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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