MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016756297 · doi:10.1111/bpa.12832

cIMPACT‐NOW update 6: new entity and diagnostic principle recommendations of the cIMPACT‐Utrecht meeting on future CNS tumor classification and grading

2020· article· en· W3016756297 on OpenAlexaff
David N. Louis, Pieter Wesseling, Kenneth Aldape, Daniel J. Brat, David Capper, Ian A. Cree, Charles G. Eberhart, Dominique Figarella‐Branger, Maryam Fouladi, Gregory N. Fuller, Caterina Giannini, Christine Haberler, Cynthia Hawkins, Takashi Komori, Johan M. Kros, Ho‐Keung Ng, Brent A. Orr, Sung‐Hye Park, Werner Paulus, Arie Perry, Torsten Pietsch, Guido Reifenberger, Marc Rosenblum, Brian Rous, Felix Sahm, Chitra Sarkar, David A. Solomon, Uri Tabori, Martin J. van den Bent, Andreas von Deimling, Michael Weller, Valerie A. White, David W. Ellison

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Pathology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersAmsterdam University Medical CentersCentre International de Recherche sur le CancerWorld Health Organization
KeywordsGrading (engineering)Taxonomy (biology)NomenclatureMedicineComputer sciencePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

cIMPACT-NOW (the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy) was established to evaluate and make practical recommendations on recent advances in the field of CNS tumor classification, particularly in light of the rapid progress in molecular insights into these neoplasms. For Round 2 of its deliberations, cIMPACT-NOW Working Committee 3 was reconstituted and convened in Utrecht, The Netherlands, for a meeting designed to review putative new CNS tumor types in advance of any future World Health Organization meeting on CNS tumor classification. In preparatory activities for the meeting and at the actual meeting, a list of possible entities was assembled and each type and subtype debated. Working Committee 3 recommended that a substantial number of newly recognized types and subtypes should be considered for inclusion in future CNS tumor classifications. In addition, the group endorsed a number of principles-relating to classification categories, approaches to classification, nomenclature, and grading-that the group hopes will also inform the future classification of CNS neoplasms.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0080.006
Research integrity0.0130.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.013

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations534
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain PathologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207