MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2510058653 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.160749

Dr. Tselios, <i>et al</i> reply

2016· letter· he· W2510058653 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Konstantinos Tselios, Dafna D. Gladman, Jiandong Su, Murray B. Urowitz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2016
Typeletter
Languagehe
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologySystemic lupus erythematosusLupus erythematosusRashCutaneous Lupus ErythematosusDiseaseInternal medicineImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: We thank Bachmeyer, et al 1 for their views on our recent article2 on mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in refractory nonrenal manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Concerning their observations on the definition of skin lesions, we have clearly indicated in the Materials and Methods section that the main indication for MMF was retrieved from the respective Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) element that was present at that particular date. The cutaneous variable of this index is defined in the SLEDAI-2K glossary as inflammatory type rash and includes acute, subacute, or chronic types of cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE). Because SLEDAI-2K was not designed to identify fluctuating activity within a particular organ system, we only reported the patients who achieved complete resolution by the end of 6 and 12 months, and … Address correspondence to Dr. M.B. Urowitz, University of Toronto Lupus Clinic, Centre for Prognosis Studies in the Rheumatic Diseases, Toronto Western Hospital, 399 Bathurst St., 1E-410B, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada. E-mail: m.urowitz{at}utoronto.ca

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0190.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→