MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903770741 · doi:10.3138/canlivj.2018-0002

Revisiting the ‘6-month’ liver transplant rule for alcohol-associated liver disease: It is time for a change but not without a sound policy first

2018· editorial· en· W2903770741 on OpenAlex
Sanjeev Sirpal, Eric M. Yoshida, Natasha Chandok

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Liver Journal · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusAlcoholic liver diseaseOddsLiver transplantationMedicineLiver diseaseAlcoholic hepatitisIntensive care medicineTransplantationSurgeryInternal medicineEnvironmental healthCirrhosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is historical reluctance in the medical community to offer liver transplantation to patients with alcoholic liver disease. Transplant programs broadly follow a policy that requires abstention from alcohol for a minimum of 6 months. This policy, however, is at odds with data that supports improved survival in patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis (SAAH). Ethicists, the public, and the transplant community must make a concerted effort to forge an updated transplant policy for SAAH that better reflects current scientific evidence for earlier transplant in well-selected recipients without unfair advantage to those of high socioeconomic status.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.267 · 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