MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2611315837 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.170144

International Treatment Recommendations Update: A Report from the GRAPPA 2016 Annual Meeting

2017· article· en· W2611315837 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Laura C. Coates, Vinod Chandran, Alexis Ogdie, Denis O’Sullivan, Mel Brooke, Ingrid Steinkoenig, Philip J. Mease, Christopher T. Ritchlin, Arthur Kavanaugh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineGuidelinePsoriatic arthritisPublishingGeneral partnershipLeagueFamily medicineLibrary scienceMedical educationPolitical scienceArthritisInternal medicinePathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the 2016 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), the treatment recommendations committee summarized its work and presented its plans for future updates. The committee announced a partnership between GRAPPA and Guideline Central to develop a pocket reference guide to the treatment recommendations. Because key new data appear regularly, the group discussed publishing periodic updates of the recommendations online through the GRAPPA Website as well as a goal of publishing another major update of the recommendations in 2020. The committee also announced that 2 GRAPPA members were awarded a grant from the International League of Associations for Rheumatology to look at potential adaptations of international treatment recommendations for resource-poor settings, particularly in South America and Africa.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0060.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.010

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis→French-language works237,207→