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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Almost 35 years ago, in 1985, the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) Governing Board established the Journal of Hepatology. Thanks to the hard work of the Editorial teams over the years, the Journal of Hepatology is now among the leading journals in gastroenterology and hepatology, with an impact factor of more than 15 and more than 2,500,000 annual article downloads. An increasing number of good articles from the hepatology community are rejected. Therefore, to better serve the demands of its members, in 2018 the EASL Governing Board decided to launch a second journal. This is happening amidst a changing landscape of publishing trends, with a strong orientation towards open access and digital content. For this reason, and to maximize outreach to an increasingly global readership, the second journal, JHEP Reports, will be full open access. As the first Editor-in-Chief, I am very proud and honoured to introduce JHEP reports to our community. JHEP Reports shares the same commitment to quality and integrity as the Journal of Hepatology and will only publish the best science that satisfies our rigorous peer review standards. Our goal is to become a respected channel for innovation in hepatology by publishing outstanding basic, translational and clinical studies. In the clinical domain, our goal is to support the development of precision medicine and new therapies in liver diseases. Therefore, we invite submissions reporting early phase clinical trials, novel diagnostic biomarkers and technological developments related to diagnostic and therapeutic devices. We are also interested in emerging fields of research, exploring the frontier between basic and translational liver research, particularly related to rapidly developing fields such as metabolic and malignant liver diseases. We encourage submissions reporting on new technological developments and the latest findings in liver pathophysiology, as they have the potential to revolutionise our understanding of the natural history of various diseases and promote/facilitate the emergence of novel concepts. These scientific innovations will have important consequences for the care of patients, and it is our mission to help accelerate their translation into clinical applications. Another objective of JHEP Reports is to ensure the effective translation of medical findings not only from scientists and clinicians to patients, but also in the other direction. Open access publishing is an opportunity to facilitate communication, to promote disease prevention, early diagnosis and implementation of new therapies. We will explore how patients can be better integrated and contribute to scientific research. We will disseminate lay versions of EASL medical recommendations and guidelines, allowing for uptake in those likely to be the health care “users” of the future: the digitally educated patient. It is our strong ambition that JHEP Reports should be at the forefront of these developments toward patient-centric care. JHEP Reports’ Editorial team is composed of 6 internationally reputed Editors that bring wide-ranging expertise and will guarantee a fair evaluation process: Professor Marina Berenguer (University of Valencia) will cover viral hepatitis and transplantation, Professor Sven Francque (University of Antwerp) NASH and metabolism, Professor Thierry Gustot (Université Libre de Bruxelles) cirrhosis and alcohol-related diseases, Robert Schwabe (Columbia University) innovation and basic research, and Professor Morris Sherman (Toronto General Hospital) liver tumours. The journal is supported by a highly dedicated EASL office team coordinated by Joël Walicki. To ensure a fast and fair evaluation process, we have composed an Editorial Board including more than 50 members, all internationally recognised clinicians and scientists; we warmly thank them for their commitment and contribution to the journal. We thank all scientists, clinicians and patients for supporting and encouraging the development of JHEP Reports. With great enthusiasm and your participation, we have compiled the first issue, which we are delighted to share with you.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Scholarly communication Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | Scholarly communicationOpen science Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it