MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020802882 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2020.04.030

Standardisation of diet and exercise in clinical trials of NAFLD-NASH: Recommendations from the Liver Forum

2020· review· en· W3020802882 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Oliver Glass, Claudia Filozof, Mazen Noureddin, Mark Berner‐Hansen, Elmer Schabel, Stephanie O. Omokaro, Jörn M. Schattenberg, Katherine Barradas, Veronica Miller, Sven Francque, Manal F. Abdelmalek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTarget Real-world evidenceAbbott MolecularGenentechFerring PharmaceuticalsMadrigal PharmaceuticalsNGM BiopharmaceuticalsIntercept PharmaceuticalsCirius TherapeuticsZafgenChimerixNational Institutes of HealthMylanQuest DiagnosticsArrowhead PharmaceuticalsIronwood Pharmaceuticals, IncorporatedAssembly BiosciencesTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.AiCurisNordic BioscienceAbbVieJanssen BiotechEA Pharma Co., Ltd.Teva Pharmaceutical IndustriesNovartisCelgeneGalectin TherapeuticsPfizerBiogenGilead SciencesMallinckrodt PharmaceuticalsInventiva PharmaEchosensViiV HealthcareAstellas Pharma USShireSyneos HealthAllerganAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbRoivant SciencesBoehringer IngelheimGlaxoSmithKlineDurect CorporationHepQuant
KeywordsClinical trialMedicineFatty liverContext (archaeology)SteatohepatitisDiseaseAlternative medicinePsychological interventionMEDLINEIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicinePathologyNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations86
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HepatologySame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207