Bibliographic record
Abstract
Finally, who should pay?In the UK, and presumably elsewhere in the world, the research community says clinical islet transplantation is not research as it is an established therapy in Canada.However, the Canadian programme is well established and experienced.Health service providers elsewhere justifiably argue that the outcomes of islet transplantation are currently too uncertain.Certainly, much more research needs to be done.However, for some people with severe hypoglycaemia, a successful transplant programme is needed now.In the UK, the charity Diabetes UK, with support from the manufacturers of the immunosuppression, is funding the first 10 patients treated here.The fact that there is no other funding is a threat to the further development of this therapy in the UK and a very major limitation to UK centres accepting referrals.This situation needs urgent resolution.In all its uncertainties, islet transplantation is where whole organ pancreas transplantation used to be.Ultimately, islet transplantation has the potential to be less traumatic than whole organ transplant and we need to be able to develop the services to provide it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.098 | 0.056 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".