MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775789737 · doi:10.1002/cyto.b.21610

ICCS/ESCCA Consensus Guidelines to detect GPI‐deficient cells in Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria (PNH) and related Disorders Part 2 – Reagent Selection and Assay Optimization for High‐Sensitivity Testing

2017· article· en· W2775789737 on OpenAlexaff
D. Robert Sutherland, Andrea Illingworth, Iuri Marinov, Fernando López Ortiz, John Andreasen, Daniel Payne, Paul K. Wallace, Michael Keeney

Bibliographic record

VenueCytometry Part B Clinical Cytometry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParoxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuriaFlow cytometryConsensus conferenceImmunologyMedicineCD59AntibodyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since publication in 2010 of the International Clinical Cytometry Society (ICCS) Consensus Guidelines for detection of Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) by flow cytometery, a great deal of work has been performed to develop, optimize, and validate a number of high-sensitivity assays to detect PNH phenotypes in both red blood cells (RBCs) and white blood cells (WBCs, neutrophils, and monocytes). This section (Part 2) of the updated ICCS PNH Consensus Guidelines will focus on specific instrument setup for these PNH assays, the identification and proper testing of appropriate antibody conjugates and combinations therof, and basic assay design. © 2017 International Clinical Cytometry Society.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations64
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytometry Part B Clinical CytometrySame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207