MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034866355 · doi:10.36691/raj.2020.17.1.001

2019 ARIA: care pathways for allergic rhinitis in Russia

2020· article· en· W3034866355 on OpenAlexaff
Musa Khaitov, Leyla S. Namazova-Baranova, N I Ilyina, О М Курбачева, Claus Bachert, Peter W. Hellings, Oliver Pfaar, Holger J. Schünemann, Dana Wallace, Anna Bedbrook, Jean Bousquet

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Journal of Allergy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmaMedicineAllergyIntensive care medicineRussian federationRespiratory systemHealth careImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most common chronic upper respiratory diseases worldwide is allergic rhinitis (AR). Despite advances in understanding the mechanisms of allergic inflammation, the symptoms of AR in most cases are not completely controlled by modern treatment methods. Allergic rhinitis is a precursor and predisposing factor for the development of other respiratory diseases, one of which is asthma. Diagnosis of AR is being actively conducted, but there is still a serious problem of uncontrolled and chaotic treatment of patients, so it is necessary to provide comprehensive medical care within the national health system. ARIA aims to develop and apply internationally recommendations for the management of patients with allergic respiratory diseases. In collaboration with other international associations that deal with the treatment and diagnosis of allergies and respiratory diseases, regulations and programs have been developed for the treatment of patients with AR, as well as when it is combined with asthma, which form the basis of ARIA. This document has been adapted for use in the field of healthcare in the Russian Federation and covers key issues related to the management of patients with AR and in combination with AR and asthma.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Journal of AllergySame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207