MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249793517 · doi:10.5858/2008-132-359-aoittn

Application of Immunohistochemistry to Thyroid Neoplasms

2008· review· en· W4249793517 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra E. Fischer, L. Sylvia

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThyroidImmunohistochemistryMedicinePathologyConfusionDifferential diagnosisContext (archaeology)Follicular phaseCytologyThyroid nodulesHistologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Context. —Thyroid lesions with nodular architecture and follicular pattern of growth often pose difficulties in accurate diagnosis during the assessment of cytologic and histologic specimens. The diagnosis of follicular neoplasm on cytology or of follicular tumor of uncertain malignant potential on histology is likely to cause confusion among clinicians and delay effective management of these lesions. Occasionally, thyroid tumors represent unusual or metastatic lesions and their accurate diagnosis requires immunohistochemical confirmation. Objective. —To review the literature on the applications of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of thyroid tumors. Data Sources. —Relevant articles indexed in PubMed (National Library of Medicine) between 1976 and 2006. Conclusions. —Our review supports the use of ancillary techniques involving a panel of antibodies suitable for immunohistochemistry and molecular analysis in the assessment of thyroid nodules. These tools can improve diagnostic accuracy when combined with standard morphologic criteria.

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)0.002
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations128
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory MedicineSame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207