Pancreas transplantation outside the USA: an update
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Due to the extreme lack of an international registry of pancreas transplantation, the purpose of this review was to conduct an extensive collection of data on the activity of pancreas transplantation in non-United States areas. RECENT FINDINGS: Over 10 000 pancreas transplants were collected in non-US areas. These countries together account for annual activity of about 1100 pancreas transplants out of which 85% are simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplants. Europe stands with 6766 pancreas transplantation, followed by Latin America with 1945, Canada with 671, Oceania with 499, Asia with 222 and Africa with five. Adding this activity of pancreas transplantation to the US data, we reach the mark of about 32 000 pancreas transplants performed worldwide and the overall activity roughly 'jumps' to approximately 2300 procedures annually. SUMMARY: From the data collected in this article, it is possible to have a current dimension of the pancreas transplantation activity worldwide. This study should serve as a stimulus for the creation of a single international registry and guide future analysis and protocols in the pancreas transplantation field in different continents.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it