MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Current trends in the diagnosis and treatment of autoimmune hepatitis in Japan

2011· article· en· W2146683016 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hiromasa Ohira, Atsushi Takahashi

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsAutoimmune hepatitisMedicineEmperipolesisAzathioprineUrsodeoxycholic acidOverlap syndromeLiver biopsyInternal medicineHepatitisLiver transplantationGastroenterologyDiseaseBiopsyTransplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While a certain international consensus has been reached regarding the diagnosis and treatment of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), there are some unique clinical characteristics of AIH in Japan. For diagnosis of AIH using the new simplified criteria proposed by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group, it is necessary to re-evaluate the antibody titer determined by using HEp-2 cells, which are widely used in Japan, and the finding of emperipolesis in liver histology, although the criteria are useful for rapid identification of AIH in routine clinical practice. The use of azathioprine as first-line therapy for AIH is limited in Japan because the drug is not covered by the Japanese national health insurance. Concomitant use of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) to reduce corticosteroids and use of UDCA as monotherapy are therefore considered promising. Moreover, a relatively good survival rate has been reported in patients who developed AIH-induced acute liver failure and underwent living-donor liver transplantation. Current trends in the diagnosis and treatment of AIH in Japan are described in this report with a review of recent findings.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatology ResearchSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207