MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138900682 · doi:10.1586/17446651.2014.922412

Improving differential diagnosis of pituitary adenomas

2014· article· en· W2138900682 on OpenAlexaff
Luis V. Syro, Carlos E. Builes‐Montaño, Antonio Di Ieva, Aydın Sav, Fabio Rotondo, Kálmán Kovács

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential diagnosisPathologicalPituitary adenomaMedicinePituitary tumorsPituitary diseaseAdenomaDiseasePathologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pituitary adenomas are common tumors arising in adenohypophysial cells or their precursors. For improving control of the disease an early diagnosis is important. Initially considered sporadic tumors, some of them are associated with familial syndromes and their recognition and classification is also required. Morphologically, pituitary adenomas represent a heterogeneous group of tumors with several subtypes and different clinical behavior thus a precise pathological diagnosis is crucial. The simple diagnosis of pituitary adenoma is not satisfactory and the correct classification of histological subtypes may predict aggressiveness in the majority of cases. Although considered not malignant, some of them are clinically aggressive and their recognition remains a challenge. In this paper we present the recent advances in the event of improving early recognition and differential diagnosis of pituitary tumors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207