MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Characteristics of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Trials Associated With Inclusion of Patients With HIV

2019· review· en· W2987564581 on OpenAlexaff
Hadas Sorotsky, David Hogg, Eitan Amir, Daniel Vilarim Araújo

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral-associated cancers and disorders
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)MedicineInclusion (mineral)Immune systemImmune checkpointOncologyVirologyImmunologyImmunotherapyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

a group with intact immunological function and survival in keeping with the general population.In contrast, the exclusion of PLWH is unsupported by current data, denies patients the benefit of ICI therapy, and is ethically unjustifiable.We advocate for a broader inclusion of these patients in oncology trials.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicViral-associated cancers and disordersFrench-language works237,207