The Management of Chronic Viral Hepatitis: A Canadian Consensus Conference 2004
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several government and nongovernment organizations held a consensus conference on the management of acute and chronic viral hepatitis to update previous management recommendations. The conference became necessary because of the introduction of new forms of therapy for both hepatitis B and hepatitis C. The conference issued recommendations on the investigation and management of chronic hepatitis B, including the use of lamivudine, adefovir and interferon. The treatment of hepatitis B in several special situations was also discussed. There were also recommendations on the investigation and treatment of chronic hepatitis C and hepatitis C-HIV coinfection. In addition, the document makes some recommendations about the provision of services by provincial governments to facilitate the delivery of care to patients with hepatitis virus infection. The present document is meant to be used by practitioners and other health care providers, including public health staff and others not directly involved in patient care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.063 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".