Translating Research into Improved Patient Care in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Other designConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.974
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 1.000
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Abstract Despite important advances in its therapeutic management, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) remains an incurable disease. Although numerous drugs exhibited beneficial effects in preclinical settings, only few have reached clinical trial phases, highlighting the challenges of translating preclinical investigations into clinical trials. Potential reasons for delayed PAH drug development may include the inherent limitations of the currently available animal and in vitro models, potential lack of appropriate standardization of the experimental design, regulatory agencies requirements, competing clinical trials and insufficient funding. Although this is not unique to PAH, there is urgency for reducing the number of false positive signals in preclinical studies and optimizing the development of innovative therapeutic targets through performance of clinical trials based on more robust experimental data. The current review discusses the challenges and opportunities in preclinical research to foster drug development in PAH.
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.
The record
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Topic
- Pulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
- Field
- Medicine
- Canadian institutions
- Université LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
- Funders
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
- Keywords
- MedicineClinical trialIntensive care medicineDrug developmentPreclinical researchPreclinical testingClinical researchStandardizationClinical study designPulmonary hypertensionDiseaseDrugPharmacologyMedical physicsPathologyInternal medicine
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes