MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413629314 · doi:10.1177/0961203316644338

Toward new criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus—a standpoint

2016· review· en· W2413629314 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatismRheumatologyAnti-nuclear antibodyDiseaseSystemic lupus erythematosusIntensive care medicineSystemic lupusImmunologyDermatologyInternal medicineAutoantibodyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While clearly different in their aims and means, classification and diagnosis both try to accurately label the disease patients are suffering from. For systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), this is complicated by the multi-organ nature of the disease and by our incomplete understanding of its pathophysiology. Hallmarks of SLE are the presence of antinuclear antibodies (ANA), and multiple immune-mediated organ symptoms that are largely independent. In an attempt to overcome limitations of the current sets of SLE classification criteria, a new four-phase approach is being developed, which is jointly supported by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). This review attempts to delineate the performance of the current sets of criteria, the reasons for the decision for classification, and not diagnostic, criteria, and to provide a background of the current approach taken.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.284 · 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