MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327698183 · doi:10.5306/wjco.v14.i3.99

Budd-Chiari syndrome in myeloproliferative neoplasms: A review of literature

2023· review· en· W4327698183 on OpenAlexaff
Mihnea‐Alexandru Găman, Matei-Alexandru Cozma, Muhammad Romail Manan, Bahadar S. Srichawla, Arkadeep Dhali, Sajjad Ali, Ahmed Nahian, Andrew C. Elton, L. V. Simhachalam Kutikuppala, Richard Christian Suteja, Sebastian Diebel, Amelia Maria Găman, Camelia Cristina Diaconu

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsNorthern College
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineEssential thrombocythemiaBudd–Chiari syndromeMyelofibrosisPathogenesisPathologyPolycythemia veraStem cellMyeloproliferative DisordersHaematopoiesisGene mutationImmunologyMutationInternal medicineBone marrowGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new edition of the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification system for tumors of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues was published in September 2017.Under the category of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), the revised document includes seven subcategories: chronic myeloid leukemia, chronic neutrophilic leukemia, polycythemia vera (PV), primary myelofibrosis (PMF), essential thrombocythemia (ET), chronic eosinophilic leukemianot otherwise specified and MPN, unclassifiable (MPN-U); of note, mastocytosis is no longer classified under the MPN category.In the current review, we focus on the diagnostic criteria for JAK2/CALR/MPL mutation-related MPNs: PV, ET, and PMF.In this regard, the 2016 changes were aimed at facilitating the distinction between masked PV and JAK2mutated ET and between prefibrotic/early and overtly fibrotic PMF.In the current communication, we (i) provide practically useful resource tables and graphs on the new diagnostic criteria including outcome, (ii) elaborate on the rationale for the 2016 changes, (iii) discuss the complementary role of mutation screening, (iv) address ongoing controversies and propose solutions, (v) attend to the challenges of applying WHO criteria in routine clinical practice, and (vi) outline future directions from the perspectives of the clinical pathologist.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207