MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947046480 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317993

British Society of Gastroenterology and UK-PSC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of primary sclerosing cholangitis

2019· article· en· W2947046480 on OpenAlexaff
Michael H. Chapman, Douglas Thorburn, Gideon M. Hirschfield, George Webster, Simon Rushbrook, Graeme Alexander, Jane Collier, Jessica Dyson, David Jones, Imran Patanwala, Collette Thain, Martine Walmsley, Stephen P. Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueGut · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsToronto Liver CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicinePrimary sclerosing cholangitisGuidelineHepatologyInternal medicineGastroenterologyPrimary careGeneral surgeryFamily medicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These guidelines on the management of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology liver section. The guideline writing committee included medical representatives from hepatology and gastroenterology groups as well as patient representatives from PSC Support. The guidelines aim to support general physicians, gastroenterologists and surgeons in managing adults with PSC or those presenting with similar cholangiopathies which may mimic PSC, such as IgG4 sclerosing cholangitis. It also acts as a reference for patients with PSC to help them understand their own management. Quality of evidence is presented using the AGREE II format. Guidance is meant to be used as a reference rather than for rigid protocol-based care as we understand that management of patients often requires individual patient-centred considerations.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations287
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGutSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207