MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153785318 · doi:10.1016/j.ekir.2021.03.446

POS-423 MAINSTREAMING GENETIC TESTING FOR ADULT NEPHROLOGY: A MODEL FOR A PUBLICLY FUNDED HEALTHCARE SYSTEM FOR AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT POLYCYSTIC KIDNEY DISEASE AND FOCAL SEGMENTAL GLOMERULOSCLEROSIS

2021· article· en· W3153785318 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan J. Elliott, Leslie C. James, Emily Lauren L. Simms, Parul Sharma, J. Lauzon, Justin Chun

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney International Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFocal segmental glomerulosclerosisGenetic testingNephrologyGenetic counselingIntensive care medicineAutosomal dominant polycystic kidney diseaseHealth carePolycystic kidney diseaseInternal medicineDiseaseKidneyPathologyBioinformaticsGeneticsGlomerulonephritisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in sequencing technology have dramatically improved our understanding of genetic kidney diseases such as polycystic kidney disease (PKD) and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). These tests have broad impacts on clinical care including prognostication, family planning, and transplant status; however, access remains difficult for many patients. Often the bottleneck to testing is the time to be seen by a member of the medical genetics team prior to testing. Our study used a multidisciplinary team of nephrologists, clinical geneticists, and genetic counsellors to create a mainstreamed pathway to accelerate genetic testing for PKD and FSGS, and to determine if these pathways impact patient satisfaction and clinical care.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney International ReportsSame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207