MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099858054 · doi:10.1148/rg.281075052

Imaging Features of von Hippel–Lindau Disease

2008· review· en· W2099858054 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Leung, Sona V. Biswas, Mark D. Duncan, Sheila Rankin

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiographics · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVon Hippel–Lindau diseaseDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease is a rare, autosomal dominantly inherited multisystem disorder characterized by development of a variety of benign and malignant tumors. The spectrum of clinical manifestations of the disease is broad and includes retinal and central nervous system hemangioblastomas, endolymphatic sac tumors, renal cysts and tumors, pancreatic cysts and tumors, pheochromocytomas, and epididymal cystadenomas. The most common causes of death in VHL disease patients are renal cell carcinoma and neurologic complications from cerebellar hemangioblastomas. The various manifestations can be demonstrated with different imaging modalities such as ultrasonography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and nuclear medicine. Although genetic testing is available, the manifestations of the syndrome are protean; therefore, imaging plays a key role in identification of abnormalities and subsequent follow-up of lesions. It is also used for screening of asymptomatic gene carriers and their long-term surveillance. Screening is important because the lesions in VHL disease are treatable; thus, early detection allows use of more conservative therapy and may enhance the patient's length and quality of life. A multidisciplinary team approach is important in screening for VHL disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations161
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiographicsSame topicCancer, Hypoxia, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207