MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309356042 · doi:10.1002/9781119105954.ch26

Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome

2022· other· en· W4309356042 on OpenAlexaff
Asaf Lebel, Amrit Kirpalani, Christoph Licht

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrombotic microangiopathyMedicineMicroangiopathic hemolytic anemiaOliguriaPallorHemolytic anemiaMicroangiopathyAnemiaShiga toxinThrombosisInternal medicineThrombotic thrombocytopenic purpuraPathologyDiseaseRenal functionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of two entities of the Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) spectrum: Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome (STEC-HUS) and complement-mediated TMA. STEC-HUS is more frequent in children than in adults, with median age around two years, although adults have more severe disease with higher mortality. The common pathologic basis of all TMA is injury to the vascular endothelium with subsequent microvascular thrombosis, which leads to consumptive thrombocytopenia, microangiopathichemolytic anemia, and kidney and other organs injury. The clinical symptoms of TMA reflect anemia, thrombocytopenia, and renal or other organ involvement, and include pallor, fatigue, shortness of breath, oliguria, and edema. HUS is an entity under the umbrella of TMA. The most common cause, STEC-HUS, has long been considered as independent of the rest of this spectrum of diseases as it has a defined trigger and known secondary cause of microangiopathy.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207