MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3044046114 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202005-2032st

Diagnosis of Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis in Adults: An Official ATS/JRS/ALAT Clinical Practice Guideline

2020· article· en· W3044046114 on OpenAlexaff
Ganesh Raghu, Martine Rémy‐Jardin, Christopher J. Ryerson, Jeffrey L. Myers, Michael Kreuter, Martina Vašáková, Elena Bargagli, Jonathan H. Chung, Bridget F. Collins, Elisabeth Bendstrup, Hassan Chami, Abigail Chua, Tamera J. Corte, Jean‐Charles Dalphin, Sonye K. Danoff, Javier Diaz‐Mendoza, Abhijit Duggal, Ryoko Egashira, T. Ewing, Mridu Gulati, Yoshikazu Inoue, Alex R. Jenkins, Kerri A. Johannson, Takeshi Johkoh, Maximiliano Tamae Kakazu, Masanori Kitaichi, Shandra L. Knight, Dirk Koschel, David J. Lederer, Yolanda Mageto, Lisa A. Maier, Carlos Matiz, Ferrán Morell, Andrew G. Nicholson, Setu Patolia, Carlos A.C. Pereira, Elisabetta Renzoni, Margaret L. Salisbury, Moisés Selman, Simon Walsh, Wim Wuyts, Kevin C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesGenentechShionogiSOS OxygèneGalectoRegeneron PharmaceuticalsFibroGenGilead SciencesSanofiCelgeneBiogenGlaxoSmithKlineBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAmerican Thoracic SocietyPfizerPulmonary Fibrosis FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchVeracyteTeva Pharmaceutical Industries
KeywordsMedicineHypersensitivity pneumonitisGuidelineClinical PracticePneumoniaFamily medicineInternal medicinePathologyLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations1,012
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis→French-language works237,207→