MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Next-Generation Allergic Rhinitis Care in Singapore: 2019 ARIA Care Pathways

2020· article· en· W3111520367 on OpenAlexaff
Xuandao Liu, De Yun Wang, Tze Choong Charn, Leslie T. Koh, Neville WY Teo, Yew Kwang Ong, Mark KT Thong, Claus Bachert, Oliver Pfaar, Holger J. Schünemann, Anna Bedbrook, Jean Bousquet

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaHealth careAllergen immunotherapyContext (archaeology)GuidelineQuality of life (healthcare)Disease managementDiseaseIntensive care medicineFamily medicineAllergyImmunologyNursingAllergenInternal medicineEconomic growthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is prevalent in Singapore, with a significant disease burden. Afflicting up to 13% of the population, AR impairs quality of life, leads to reduced work productivity and is an independent risk factor for asthma. In the last 2 decades, local studies have identified patient and physician behaviours leading to suboptimal control of the disease. Yet, there is an overall lack of attention to address this important health issue. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) is a European organisation aimed at implementing evidence-based management for AR worldwide. Recent focus in Europe has been directed towards empowering patients for self-management, exploring the complementary role of mobile health, and establishing healthcare system-based integrated care pathways. Consolidation of these ongoing efforts has led to the release of the 2019 ARIA care pathways. This review summarises the ARIA update with particular emphasis on the current status of adult AR in Singapore. In addition, we identify unmet needs and future opportunities for research and clinical care of AR in the local context.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Academy of Medicine SingaporeSame topicAllergic Rhinitis and SensitizationFrench-language works237,207