MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205190785 · doi:10.1177/10668969211070178

Surgical Pathology Diagnostic Pitfalls of Hepatoblastoma

2022· review· en· W4205190785 on OpenAlexafffund
Finn Morgan Auld, Consolato Sergi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsHepatoblastomaPathologyMedicineMalignancySurgical pathologyMolecular pathologyHistogenesisAnatomical pathologyImmunohistochemistryRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hepatoblastoma (HB) is the most common malignancy within the rare cohort of pediatric primary liver tumors. It may arise sporadically or in association with germline mutations in specific genetic syndromes. Histogenesis recapitulates fetal hepatic development, however, this tumor can exhibit a markedly heterogeneous appearance both macroscopically and under the microscope. Histologic subtypes are classified based on morphologic appearance, with additional discrimination based on emerging molecular and immunohistochemical features. Numerous diagnostic pitfalls exist from clinical presentation through to ancillary testing; at all stages, the surgical pathologist must be discerning and open to collaboration with colleagues of different specialties. Problematic areas include the adequacy of tissue sampling, correlation of histology with radiologic appearance and alpha feto-protein (AFP) serology, forming a diagnostic consensus within the pediatric pathology community and choosing a shrewd immunohistochemical panel. This review discusses the sequence of events leading up to histologic assessment, and the nuances of microscopic evaluation. Along the way, pitfalls are highlighted, providing a tool for the surgical pathologists to support their individual approach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.349 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207