MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2504494094 · doi:10.1186/s13223-016-0138-9

Clinical Experience with Octagam® 10 %, a solvent detergent virus inactivated intravenous immunoglobulin: a Canadian retrospective review of utilization

2016· review· en· W2504494094 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stephen Betschel, Richard Warrington, R. Robert Schellenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of British ColumbiaHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAntibodyIntravenous InfusionsIntravenous useVirusIntensive care medicineInternal medicineImmunologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, intravenous immune globulin (IVIg) products are licensed for six disease indications, however it has been demonstrated that patients with a number of other conditions also benefit from IVIg. Here we report the routine clinical use of Octagam(®) 10 % across three Canadian institutions. A total of 135 patients were treated with Octagam(®), for conditions represented by five distinct indication groups. The results of this review indicate that Octagam(®) has been well adopted and is prescribed to Canadian patients similar to other IVIg products. In alignment with current practices, 85 % of Octagam's utilization was classified as appropriate based on Canadian IVIg guidelines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology→Same topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders→French-language works237,207→