MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766040614 · doi:10.1385/1-59745-049-9:47

Current Status of Clinical Islet Cell Transplantation

2006· review· en· W2766040614 on OpenAlexaffabout
R. T. Lakey Jonathan, Mirbolooki Mohammadreza, A. M. James Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsletTransplantationImmunosuppressionIslet cell transplantationMedicineClinical trialPancreas transplantationIntensive care medicineDiabetes mellitusImmunologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyKidney transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical outcomes of pancreas transplantation were superior to that of islet transplantation until the introduction of the Edmonton protocol. Significant advances in islet isolation and purification technology, novel immunosuppression and tolerance strategies, and effective antiviral prophylaxis have renewed interest in clinical islet transplantation for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. The introduction of a steroid-free antirejection protocol and islets prepared from two donors led to high rates of insulin independence. The Edmonton protocol has been successfully replicated by other centers in an international multicenter trial. A number of key refinements in pancreas transportation, islet preparation, and newer immunological conditioning and induction therapies have led to continued advancement through extensive collaboration between key centers. This chapter provides an overview of the history of islet transplantation followed by a discussion of the state of the art of clinical islet transplantation. The challenges facing the clinician-scientist in the 21st century are also presented in this review.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations73
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207