MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409349526 · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2012.182246

Pheochromocytoma

2012· article· en· W2409349526 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew P. Estey, Eleftherios P. Diamandis, Graeme Eisenhofer, Karel Pacák, Eamonn R. Maher, William F. Young, Ronald R. de Krijger

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal and Paraganglionic Tumors
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPheochromocytomaMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pheochromocytomas (PCCs)10 are catecholamine-secreting tumors derived from chromaffin tissue of the adrenal medulla. Closely related tumors, called extraadrenal paragangliomas (PGL), can arise at extraadrenal sites. Catecholamine secretion from these tumors is often episodic, causing headache, perspiration, palpitations, and hypertension. If not recognized and treated, PCC and PGL (PPGL) can lead to arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. The diagnosis of PPGL relies on biochemical evidence of excess catecholamine secretion and confirmation of tumor presence by imaging studies. Although many different biochemical tests have historically been used in screening for PPGL, measurements of the catecholamine breakdown products metanephrine and normetanephrine in plasma and urine are now regarded as the first-line tests. Florid increases of either of these metabolites are associated with a nearly 100% probability of PPGL. However, it can be challenging to differentiate between true-positive and false-positive results when metanephrine or normetanephrine concentrations are only slightly above the upper limit of the respective reference interval.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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
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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ChemistrySame topicAdrenal and Paraganglionic TumorsFrench-language works237,207