MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948257756 · doi:10.1111/ctr.13623

<i>Candida</i> infections in solid organ transplantation: Guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice

2019· article· en· W2948257756 on OpenAlexaff
Saima Aslam, Coleman Rotstein

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Transplantation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineTransplantationEchinocandinOrgan transplantationCandida infectionsPancreas transplantationAntifungalInvasive candidiasisInternal medicineKidney transplantationDermatologyFluconazole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These updated guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice provide recommendations for the diagnosis and management of Candida infections in solid organ transplant recipients. Candida infections manifest primarily as candidemia and invasive candidiasis and cause considerable morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and initiation of treatment are necessary to reduce mortality. For both candidemia and invasive candidiasis, an echinocandin is recommended for initial therapy. However, early transition to oral therapy is encouraged when patients are stable and the organism is susceptible. Candida prophylaxis should be targeted for high-risk patients in liver, small bowel, and pancreas transplant recipients. Future research should address which patient groups may benefit most from preventative antifungal therapy strategies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations157
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical TransplantationSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207