The 2018 Lake Louise Acute Mountain Sickness Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Roach, Robert C., Peter H. Hackett, Oswald Oelz, Peter Bärtsch, Andrew M. Luks, Martin J. MacInnis, J. Kenneth Baillie, and The Lake Louise AMS Score Consensus Committee. The 2018 Lake Louise Acute Mountain Sickness Score. High Alt Med Biol 19:1-4, 2018.- The Lake Louise Acute Mountain Sickness (AMS) scoring system has been a useful research tool since first published in 1991. Recent studies have shown that disturbed sleep at altitude, one of the five symptoms scored for AMS, is more likely due to altitude hypoxia per se, and is not closely related to AMS. To address this issue, and also to evaluate the Lake Louise AMS score in light of decades of experience, experts in high altitude research undertook to revise the score. We here present an international consensus statement resulting from online discussions and meetings at the International Society of Mountain Medicine World Congress in Bolzano, Italy, in May 2014 and at the International Hypoxia Symposium in Lake Louise, Canada, in February 2015. The consensus group has revised the score to eliminate disturbed sleep as a questionnaire item, and has updated instructions for use of the score.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".