MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206317147 · doi:10.1093/jalm/jfab121

Clinical, Methodological, and Practical Considerations for Algorithmic Testing in Autoimmune Serology

2021· review· en· W4206317147 on OpenAlexaff
Lusia Sepiashvili, Stacy M. Kenyon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSerologyContext (archaeology)AutoantibodyReflexIntensive care medicineImmunologyInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Autoimmune serology tests are central to the classification, screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of a variety of autoimmune disorders. To improve the appropriateness of serologic evaluation and support laboratory resource utilization, reflex testing approaches have been proposed and implemented across clinical laboratories. Reflex testing involves a staged approach where an initial test result triggers subsequent tests based on prespecified rules. CONTENT: Various reflex testing approaches in the context of antinuclear antibody-associated rheumatic disease, antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody-associated vasculitis, celiac disease, and myasthenia gravis are reviewed here. Clinical, analytical, and practical considerations of reflex testing implementation are addressed as well as associated limitations and challenges. SUMMARY: Serology reflex testing algorithms for the evaluation of autoimmune diseases can support clinical diagnosis and laboratory resource use but may be challenging to implement and are often applied variably across institutions. Assessments of evidence-driven guidelines, clinical impact, and impact on laboratory workflow are essential to this task.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.125
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.125
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.472
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.066 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Applied Laboratory MedicineSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207