MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291002011 · doi:10.51731/cjht.2022.415

Normal Immunoglobulin (Human) 10% and Recombinant Human Hyaluronidase (HyQvia)

2022· article· en· W4291002011 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CADTH

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health Technologies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReimbursementHyaluronidaseRecombinant DNAAntibodyMedicineDrugHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ImmunologyPharmacologyChemistryEnzymePolitical scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CADTH reimbursement reviews are comprehensive assessments of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, as well as patient and clinician perspectives, of a drug or drug class. The assessments inform non-binding recommendations that help guide the reimbursement decisions of Canada's federal, provincial, and territorial governments, with the exception of Quebec. This review assesses immunoglobulin human and recombinant human hyaluronidase (HyQvia) as a solution for subcutaneous infusion, available in the following strengths: normal immunoglobulin (human) 10%: 2.5 g/25 mL, 5 g/50 mL, 10 g/100 mL, 20 g/200 mL, 30 g/300 mL recombinant human hyaluronidase: 200 units/1.25 mL, 400 units/2.5 mL, 800 units/5 mL, 1,600 units/10 mL and 2,400 units/15 mL Indication: As replacement therapy for primary humoral immunodeficiency and secondary humoral immunodeficiency in adult patients.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health TechnologiesSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207