MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249803865 · doi:10.1111/ijlh.12506

Congenital erythrocytosis

2016· review· en· W4249803865 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. F. McMullin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Laboratory Hematology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsErythropoietinMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Congenital erythrocytosis is by definition present from birth. Patients frequently present in childhood or as young adults and a family history may be present. The erythrocytosis can be primary where there is a defect in the erythroid compartment of secondary where increased erythropoietin production produced due to the defect leads to an erythrocytosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Primary causes include erythropoietin receptor mutations. Congenital secondary causes include mutations in the genes involved in the oxygen-sensing pathway and haemoglobins with abnormal oxygen affinity. Investigations for the cause include an erythropoietin level, oxygen dissociation curve, haemoglobin electrophoresis and sequencing for known gene variants. RESULTS: The finding of a known or new molecular variant confirms a diagnosis of congenital erythrocytosis. A congenital erythrocytosis may be an incidental finding but nonspecific symptoms are described. Major thromboembolic events have been noted in some cases. Low-dose aspirin and venesection are therapeutic manoeuvres which should be considered in managing these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rare individuals presenting often at a young age may have a congenital erythrocytosis. Molecular investigation may reveal a lesion. However, in the majority, currently no defect is identified.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Laboratory HematologySame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207