MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2301359171 · doi:10.1086/649542

Tuberculosis: A Comprehensive Clinical Reference Edited by H. Simon  Schaaf and Alimuddih  Zumla Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier, 2009. 1046 pp. Illustrated. $199.00 (hardcover).

2009· article· en· W2301359171 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Elwood

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease Control
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisGerontologyHumanitiesPathologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tuberculosis is arguably among the most written about diseases in the history of medicine. It reaches far into the past, as there was clear evidence of its existence >5000 years ago, and has received the attention of the Old Testament, Hipocritas, and Gallen. One would not have foreseen, however, that as we approach 2012—the 130th anniversary of Robert Koch's conclusive demonstration of the bacterial cause of tuberculosis—the disease would remain prominent in medical literature. Despite the passage of time and the attention of gifted researchers armed with the latest scientific and molecular weapons, tuberculosis has not given up all its secrets. Those who work extensively in the field of tuberculosis know too well of the many uncertainties that we face in the clinical management of individual cases. The treatment of the disease can, of course, be extremely straightforward in a routine case with a susceptible organism and a willing, cooperative, non-adverse-event-prone patient. Although no new medications have been developed for the control of tuberculosis since the 1960s, it could be argued that case management is becoming increasingly more complex. A new textbook devoted entirely to tuberculosis would therefore be welcomed by the international community of phthisologists.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.104

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical Infectious Diseases→Same topicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→