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 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.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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