Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renal tumours of childhood are rare, although they are one of the most common solid tumours in children. They include numerous entities, which have different clinical, histological, molecular biological and prognostic features, so their precise diagnosis and staging are critical for appropriate treatment. The most common is Wilms' tumour (WT) with ~80-85 % of all cases, whereas other entities including mesoblastic nephroma, clear cell sarcoma, rhabdoid tumour, renal cell carcinoma, metanephric tumours and others are very rare (2-4 % each) which explains why they represent a big diagnostic challenge for diagnostic pathologists. They are subclassified into three risk groups - low, intermediate and high - which have different treatments and prognosis. There are two big study groups which have different approaches but remarkable similar outcomes. The International Society of Paediatric Oncology approach (followed in most of the world) is based on preoperative chemotherapy, followed by surgery and further therapy, whereas the Children's Oncology Group approach (followed mainly in the United States and Canada) is based on primary surgery, followed by postoperative treatment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".