MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970999010 · doi:10.3324/haematol.2019.223073

Guidelines from the 2017 European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia for management of HHV-6 infection in patients with hematologic malignancies and after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

2019· review· en· W2970999010 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine N. Ward, Joshua A. Hill, Petr Hubáček, Rafael de la Cámara, Roberto Crocchiolo, Hermann Einsele, David Navarro, Christine Robin, Catherine Cordonnier, Per Ljungman

Bibliographic record

VenueHaematologica · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersAstellas PharmaGilead SciencesPfizer
KeywordsMedicineHematopoietic stem cell transplantationHuman herpesvirus 6DiseaseTransplantationEncephalitisHematologic diseaseStem cellImmunologyPopulationHematopoietic stem cellIntensive care medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)HaematopoiesisInternal medicineViral diseaseHerpesviridaeBiologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of the two human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) species, human herpesvirus 6B (HHV-6B) encephalitis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Guidelines for the management of HHV-6 infections in patients with hematologic malignancies or post-transplant were prepared a decade ago but there have been no other guidelines since then despite significant advances in the understanding of HHV-6 encephalitis, its therapy, and other aspects of HHV-6 disease in this patient population. Revised guidelines prepared at the 2017 European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia covering diagnosis, preventative strategies and management of HHV-6 disease are now presented.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations149
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaematologicaSame topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus researchFrench-language works237,207