MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214706886 · doi:10.3390/jcm11051278

Paediatric Behçet’s Disease: A Comprehensive Review with an Emphasis on Monogenic Mimics

2022· review· en· W4214706886 on OpenAlexaff
Ovgu Kul Cınar, Micol Romano, Ferhat Güzel, Paul Brogan, Erkan Demirkaya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersRosetrees Trust
KeywordsMedicineDiseasePresentation (obstetrics)Intensive care medicineBioinformaticsPathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behçet's disease (BD) is a polygenic condition with a complex immunopathogenetic background and challenging diagnostic and therapeutic concepts. Advances in genomic medicine have provided intriguing insights into disease pathogenesis over the last decade, especially into monogenic mimics of BD. Although a rare condition, paediatric BD should be considered an important differential diagnosis, especially in cases with similar phenotypes. Emerging reports of monogenic mimics have indicated the importance of genetic testing, particularly for those with early-onset, atypical features and familial aggregation. Treatment options ought to be evaluated in a multidisciplinary setting, given the complexity and diverse organ involvement. Owing to the rarity of the condition, there is a paucity of paediatric trials; thus, international collaboration is warranted to provide consensus recommendations for the management of children and young people. Herein, we summarise the current knowledge of the clinical presentation, immunopathogenetic associations and disease mechanisms in patients with paediatric BD and BD-related phenotypes, with particular emphasis on recently identified monogenic mimics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207