MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108508092 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000011151

Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America, American Academy of Neurology, and American College of Rheumatology

2020· article· en· W3108508092 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Paul M. Lantos, Jeffrey A. Rumbaugh, Linda K. Bockenstedt, Yngve Falck–Ytter, Maria E. Aguero‐Rosenfeld, Paul G. Auwaerter, Kelly Baldwin, Raveendhara R. Bannuru, Kiran Belani, William Bowie, John A. Branda, David B. Clifford, Francis J. DiMario, John Halperin, Peter J. Krause, Valéry Lavergne, Matthew H. Liang, H. Cody Meissner, Lise E. Nigrovic, James J. Nocton, Mikala C. Osani, Amy A. Pruitt, Jane Rips, Lynda E. Rosenfeld, Margot Savoy, Sunil K. Sood, Allen C. Steere, Franc Strle, Robert P. Sundel, Jean I. Tsao, Elizaveta E. Vaysbrot, Gary P. Wormser, Lawrence Zemel

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCenter for AIDS Research, University of WashingtonCenters for Medicare and Medicaid ServicesEMD SeronoCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institutes of HealthLyme Disease AssociationSun PharmaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteShionogiAmerican Gastroenterological AssociationEuropean Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious DiseasesHorizon TherapeuticsAssociation of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease CanadaArthritis FoundationJohns Hopkins UniversityGordon and Llura Gund FoundationAtara BiotherapeuticsGlobal Lyme AllianceBay Area Lyme FoundationChildren's Hospitals and Clinics of MinnesotaBaxter InternationalMichigan Department of Health and Human ServicesBoston Scientific CorporationBristol-Myers SquibbTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesPfizerInfectious Diseases Society of AmericaBiogenU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesGlaxoSmithKlineHeart Rhythm SocietyPfizer CanadaAmerican Academy of NeurologyG. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers FoundationCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityGilead SciencesJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RSGeorge Gund FoundationTakeda OncologySt. Jude MedicalYale UniversityBoehringer IngelheimAmgenGenentechMinistrstvo za zdravjeAbbott LaboratoriesSanofiChina Medical BoardNational Science FoundationU.S. Department of DefenseAlereMichigan State UniversityAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineLyme diseaseErythema migransInfectious disease (medical specialty)LYMENeurologyFamily medicineRheumatologyDiseaseInternal medicineIntensive care medicinePediatricsBorrelia burgdorferiImmunologyPathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of Lyme disease was developed by a multidisciplinary panel representing the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). The scope of this guideline includes prevention of Lyme disease, and the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease presenting as erythema migrans, Lyme disease complicated by neurologic, cardiac, and rheumatologic manifestations, Eurasian manifestations of Lyme disease, and Lyme disease complicated by coinfection with other tick-borne pathogens. This guideline does not include comprehensive recommendations for babesiosis and tick-borne rickettsial infections, which are published in separate guidelines. The target audience for this guideline includes primary care physicians and specialists caring for this condition such as infectious diseases specialists, emergency physicians, internists, pediatricians, family physicians, neurologists, rheumatologists, cardiologists and dermatologists in North America.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.018

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations68
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207