MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900044434 · doi:10.1016/j.bbcan.2018.10.005

Dancing from bottoms up – Roles of the POZ-ZF transcription factor Kaiso in Cancer

2018· review· en· W2900044434 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina C. Pierre, Shawn M. Hercules, Clayton Yates, Juliet M. Daniel

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Reviews on Cancer · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWnt signaling pathwayCancer researchTranscription factorMetastasisProstate cancerCancerBreast cancerBiologyMedicineInternal medicineSignal transductionCell biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: other
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Molecular biology review of the transcription factor Kaiso in cancer; the object is cancer biology.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This review concerns molecular mechanisms in cancer, not metaresearch.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: medium

Biomedical cancer biology review of transcription factor Kaiso; title is domain, abstract missing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.390
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
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

Citations68
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBiochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Reviews on CancerSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207