MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247755607 · doi:10.1111/cei.12554

7<sup>th</sup>International Immunoglobulin Conference: Poster Presentations

2014· article· en· W4247755607 on OpenAlexaff
K. Warnatz, Mark Ballow, M. Stangel, Vera Bril

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical & Experimental Immunology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCSL Behring Foundation for Research and Advancement of Patient Health
KeywordsMedicineAntibodyImmunologyPrimary immunodeficiencyDosingImmunodeficiencyTransplantationIntensive care medicineImmune systemPharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pan-European survey provides useful information on the accessibility and trends of intravenous and subcutaneous immunoglobulin (IVIg/SCIg) therapy, which is used to treat primary immunodeficiency disorders (PIDs). Although immunoglobulin (Ig) therapy is the first-line treatment for PIDs, the mechanisms of action of Ig therapy may differ according to the condition it is used to treat. Moreover, intriguing presentations suggest that further investigation is required to understand more clearly both the haematological and immunoregulatory effects of therapeutic immunoglobulin. This can ultimately provide more information on optimizing Ig therapy efficacy, and establish whether individualized dosing regimens for patients will be conducive to better clinical outcomes. In addition to treating autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, there is evidence to suggest that immunoglobulins can potentially play a role in transplantation, which warrants further investigation for future use.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2850.146

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical & Experimental ImmunologySame topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune DisordersFrench-language works237,207