MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923666273 · doi:10.21037/tau.2019.03.06

Machine preservation of donor kidneys in transplantation

2019· review· en· W2923666273 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjay V. Patel, Alp Şener, Rabindra N. Bhattacharjee, Patrick Luke

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Andrology and Urology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine perfusionMedicinePerfusionTransplantationIschemiaKidney transplantationKidneyRenal functionCardiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing demands for 'less than ideal' kidneys for transplantation, machine perfusion of kidneys has been utilized to improve the preservation of kidneys during storage. Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) of renal allografts has been shown to reduce delayed graft function rates in both expanded criteria and donation after cardiac death renal allografts. However, the beneficial impact upon long-term graft function is unclear. There has been emerging evidence that both subnormothermic (room temperature) and normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) of allografts have beneficial effects with regards to early graft function, survival and injury in pre-clinical and early clinical studies. Additionally, machine perfusion allows functional assessment of the organ prior to transplantation. Ultimately, the greatest benefit of machine perfusion may be the ability to treat the organ with agents to protect the graft against ischemia reperfusion injury, while awaiting transplantation.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Andrology and UrologySame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207