MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462215447 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000001333

BK Polyomavirus and the Transplanted Kidney

2016· review· en· W2462215447 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Lamarche, Julie Orio, Suzon Collette, Lynne Senécal, Marie‐Josée Hébert, E. Renoult, Lee Anne Tibbles, Jean‐Sébastien Delisle

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPolyomavirus and related diseases
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBK virusPolyomavirus InfectionsImmunologyVirusNephropathyImmune systemAsymptomaticMedicinePopulationPathophysiologyRespiratory tractImmunopathologyKidneyBiologyKidney transplantationPathologyRespiratory systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief BK polyomavirus is ubiquitous, with a seropositivity rate of over 75% in the adult population. Primary infection is thought to occur in the respiratory tract, but asymptomatic BK virus latency is established in the urothelium. In immunocompromised host, the virus can reactivate but rarely compromises kidney function except in renal grafts, where it causes a tubulointerstitial inflammatory response similar to acute rejection. Restoring host immunity against the virus is the cornerstone of treatment. This review covers the virus-intrinsic features, the posttransplant microenvironment as well as the host immune factors that underlie the pathophysiology of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. Current and promising therapeutic approaches to treat or prevent this complication are discussed in relation to the complex immunopathology of this condition. Lamarche et al review the virus-intrinsic features, the posttransplant micro-environmentand the host immunological factors that underlie the pathophysiology of BK virus nephropathy.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations86
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicPolyomavirus and related diseasesFrench-language works237,207