MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146732755 · doi:10.1183/09059180.00001814

Diagnosis and management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: French practical guidelines

2014· review· en· W2146732755 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Cottin, Bruno Crestani, Dominique Valeyre, B. Wallaert, Jacques Cadranel, Jean‐Charles Dalphin, Philippe Delaval, Dominique Israël‐Biet, Romain Kessler, Martine Reynaud‐Gaubert, B. Aguilaniu, Benoit Bouquillon, Philippe Carré, Claire Danel, Jean‐Baptiste Faivre, G. Ferretti, N. Just, S. Kouzan, François Lebargy, S. Marchand‐Adam, Bruno Philippe, Grégoire Prévôt, B. Stach, Françoise Thivolet-Béjui, Jean-François Cordier

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Review · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueHospices Civils de LyonInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsMedicinePulmonologistsIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisMultidisciplinary approachCompetence (human resources)Multidisciplinary teamCryptogenic Organizing PneumoniaIntensive care medicineModalitiesIdiopathic interstitial pneumoniaFamily medicineLungNursingManagementPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the most frequent chronic idiopathic interstitial pneumonia in adults. The management of rare diseases in France has been organised by a national plan for rare diseases, which endorsed a network of expert centres for rare diseases throughout France. This article is an overview of the executive summary of the French guidelines for the management of IPF, an initiative that emanated from the French National Reference Centre and the Network of Regional Competence Centres for Rare Lung Diseases. This review aims at providing pulmonologists with a document that: 1) combines the current available evidence; 2) reviews practical modalities of diagnosis and management of IPF; and 3) is adapted to everyday medical practice. The French practical guidelines result from the combined efforts of a coordination committee, a writing committee and a multidisciplinary review panel, following recommendations from the Haute Autorité de Santé. All recommendations included in this article received at least 90% agreement by the reviewing panel. Herein, we summarise the main conclusions and practical recommendations of the French guidelines.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations83
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory ReviewSame topicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary FibrosisFrench-language works237,207