MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114995713 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2011.06.013

Sirolimus – It doesn’t deserve its bad Rap(a)

2011· review· en· W2114995713 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Greg J. McKenna, James F. Trotter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSirolimusMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are few medications in the field of transplantation that evoke such strong opinions as Sirolimus – it is either loved or loathed. Initial concerns about side effects and the 2002 black box warning from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the risk of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) meant that for many years, Sirolimus was not used widely in liver transplantation. However, recent data show that Sirolimus offers potential benefit in specific areas such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected grafts, with acceptable risk to benefit ratios.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.010

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HepatologySame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207