MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316669589 · doi:10.1007/s10875-022-01418-y

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Immunological Management of Chromosome 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome and Other Defects in Thymic Development

2023· review· en· W4316669589 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Mustillo, Kathleen E. Sullivan, Iván K. Chinn, Luigi D. Notarangelo, Élie Haddad, E. Graham Davies, M. Teresa de la Morena, Nicholas Hartog, Joyce E. Yu, Vivian Hernandez‐Trujillo, Winnie Ip, José Luis Franco, Eleonora Gambineri, Scott E. Hickey, Liz Varga, M. Louise Markert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Immunology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeletion syndromeDiGeorge syndromeImmunologyChromosomeMedical microbiologyMedicineBiologyGeneticsIntensive care medicineGenePhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current practices vary widely regarding the immunological work-up and management of patients affected with defects in thymic development (DTD), which include chromosome 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome (22q11.2del) and other causes of DiGeorge syndrome (DGS) and coloboma, heart defect, atresia choanae, retardation of growth and development, genital hypoplasia, ear anomalies/deafness (CHARGE) syndrome. Practice variations affect the initial and subsequent assessment of immune function, the terminology used to describe the condition and immune status, the accepted criteria for recommending live vaccines, and how often follow-up is needed based on the degree of immune compromise. The lack of consensus and widely varying practices highlight the need to establish updated immunological clinical practice guidelines. These guideline recommendations provide a comprehensive review for immunologists and other clinicians who manage immune aspects of this group of disorders.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations44
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical ImmunologySame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207