MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998341485 · doi:10.1055/s-0039-1698464

Microbiology of Cystic Fibrosis Airway Disease

2019· review· en· W2998341485 on OpenAlexaff
Ana C. Blanchard, Valerie Waters

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystic fibrosisMedicinePseudomonas aeruginosaStaphylococcus aureusIntensive care medicinePopulationDiseaseBurkholderiaEpidemiologyBurkholderia cepacia complexImmunologyRespiratory failureMicrobiologyInternal medicineBacteriaEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although survival of individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) has been continuously improving for the past 40 years, respiratory failure secondary to recurrent pulmonary infections remains the leading cause of mortality in this patient population. Certain pathogens such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and species of the Burkholderia cepacia complex continue to be associated with poorer clinical outcomes including accelerated lung function decline and increased mortality. In addition, other organisms such as anaerobes, viruses, and fungi are increasingly recognized as potential contributors to disease progression. Culture-independent molecular methods are also being used for diagnostic purposes and to examine the interaction of microorganisms in the CF airway. Given the importance of CF airway infections, ongoing initiatives to promote understanding of the epidemiology, clinical course, and treatment options for these infections are needed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Citations163
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207