MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163038896 · doi:10.1586/ers.11.93

The clinical potential of<i>ex vivo</i>lung perfusion

2012· review· en· W2163038896 on OpenAlexaff
Marcelo Cypel, Shaf Keshavjee

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Respiratory Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEconomic shortageLungLung transplantationTransplantationPerfusionEx vivoIntensive care medicineSurgeryIn vivoInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of patients listed for lung transplantation largely exceeds the number of available transplantable organs because of both a shortage of organ donors and a low utilization rate of donor lungs. Normothermic ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is a method that maintains the organ in physiologically protective conditions outside the body during preservation, and shows great promise to increase utilization of donor lungs by allowing more accurate evaluation, as well as treatment and repair, of damaged donor lungs prior to transplantation. This article will cover the rationale, technical details and results of experimental and clinical studies with EVLP. The significant potential applications of EVLP in lung transplantation, lung regeneration and oncology are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations36
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Respiratory MedicineSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207