Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protocol biopsies in renal transplantation are those that are procured at predetermined times post renal transplantation, regardless of renal function. These biopsies have been useful to study the natural history of the transplanted kidney as they have detected unexpected - i.e. "subclinical" pathology. The most significant subclinical pathologies that have been detected with protocol biopsies have been acute lesions, such as cellular and antibody mediated rejection, and chronic lesions, such as interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, and transplant glomerulopathy. The potential benefit of early recognition of the above lesions is that their early treatment may result in improved long-term outcomes. Conversely, the identification of normal histology on a protocol biopsy, may inform us about the safety of reduction in overall immunosuppression. Our centre, as well as others, is attempting to develop non-invasive methods of immune monitoring of renal transplant patients. However, we believe that until such methods have been developed and validated, the protocol biopsy will remain an indispensable tool for the complete care of renal transplant patients.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".