MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173328927 · doi:10.1684/abc.2015.1071

A case of hypercalcemia Indications for 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D prescription

2015· article· en· W2173328927 on OpenAlexaff
D. Malandain, G. Roussey, Anne-Gaëlle Leloupp, Nolwenn Graveline, Damien Masson, Kalyane Bach‐Ngohou

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales de biologie clinique · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitamin D and neurologyCalcitriolConfusionMedicineMedical prescriptionInternal medicineCalcitriol receptorEndocrinologyCYP24A1vitamin D deficiencySarcoidosisParathyroid hormoneHormoneCalciumPharmacologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circulating vitamin D is found in various forms: 25-hydroxyvitamin D or calcidiol, majority circulating form, is a "pro-hormon" which will be converted to 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D or calcitriol, hormone corresponding to vitamin D active form. While determination of 25-hydroxyvitamin D serum levels reflects vitamin D status of patients, determination of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D serum level is only indicated in rare cases of suspected hypersensitivity vitamin D in children or of sarcoidosis in adults. There are too many confusion between these two vitamin forms, resulting in inappropriate prescription of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D. Here, we describe a case of hypersensitivity to vitamin D by mutation of CYP24A1. We propose to review the interest of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D assay in different pathologies, to describe the assay techniques and remind the good prescribing practices of this parameter.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales de biologie cliniqueSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207