MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093287146 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.200993

Update on Sweet Syndrome in Eosinophilic Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis

2020· letter· en· W3093287146 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranulomatosis with polyangiitisEosinophilicEosinophiliaMedicineDermatologyVasculitisSweet SyndromeImmunologyPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: I read the article entitled, “Sweet Syndrome in Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis,” published in the July issue of The Journal 1, with great interest. However, it is important to mention concerns and issues with regard to investigations, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and treatment of Sweet syndrome with vasculitis as presented by the authors. It is relevant to place these issues for the knowledge of the readers of this article. In these patients, it is pertinent to take family history due to genetic association with the presence of HLA-B542. The patient presented in the Murphy, et al 1 case report is asthmatic, and eosinophilia on blood investigations is usually seen in such patients because eosinophils are granulocytes with a major role in allergic reactions and parasitic … Address correspondence to Dr. S. Agarwal, B-10A, Faculty Quarters, NEIGRIHMS, Mawdiangdiang, Shillong, Meghalaya 793018, India. Email: drsharat88{at}yahoo.com, drsharat88{at}yahoo.com.

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.

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 categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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