MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754586014 · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30879-6

After asthma: redefining airways diseases

2017· review· en· W2754586014 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesMedical Research CouncilGenentechNational Institutes of HealthMerck CanadaInternational Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung DiseaseWellcome TrustHealth Research Council of New ZealandF. Hoffmann-La RocheTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMassachusetts Medical SocietyRegeneron PharmaceuticalsEuropean CommissionSanofiAstraZenecaNovartis Pharmaceuticals UK LimitedAmgenNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstitutePfizerGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsAsthmaMedicineSmall airwaysIntensive care medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

momentum to the recent encouraging progress in new drug discovery and, as did the first asthma guidelines published 27 years ago, 14-17 lead to a decade or more of improved outcomes. We conclude the Commission with seven key recom mendations and summarise our views on how these could be developed to benefit patients with asthma (panel 1).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.274 · 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