Resolution of thrombotic microangiopathy following renal transplant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is characterized by aggregation of platelets in the renal and/or systemic circulation, thrombocytopenia and intravascular haemolysis. TMA is well recognized in the setting of renal transplantation and has been attributed to a variety of aetiologies such as recurrence of original disease, use of calcineurin inhibitors, acute rejection and viral infections [1,2]. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) and haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS) represent the two most frequently encountered clinical presentations of TMA. There is considerable overlap in the clinical features of HUS and TTP and it is often difficult to distinguish between these entities. Moreover, in the setting of renal transplantation, both entities have been described, suggesting that the same underlying mechanism may result in TTP in some individuals and HUS in others [1]. The commonality between these syndromes makes it tempting to lump them together into the single entity of TMA. There are, however, important differences in the underlying disease mechanisms that may have prognostic and therapeutic implications, particularly in the setting of renal transplantation [3].
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".