MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389687760 · doi:10.46747/cfp.6912833

Stratégies thérapeutiques individualisées et facteurs à considérer chez les patients atteints d’asthme léger

2023· review· fr· W4389687760 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mark E. Waite, Connie Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Family Physician · 2023
Typereview
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsMoncton Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectif Mettre en valeur les recommandations des lignes directrices de 2021 de la Société canadienne de thoracologie (SCT) pour les adultes et les enfants de 12 ans et plus, et aborder les controverses entourant leur actualisation. Sources de l’information Les lignes directrices de 2021 de la SCT sur l’asthme. Message principal L’asthme est un problème souvent rencontré en soins primaires. Un mauvais contrôle des symptômes et les exacerbations contribuent considérablement à la morbidité. Au cours des dernières années, les lignes directrices de pratique clinique ont eu tendance à préconiser un traitement plus intense de l’asthme très léger et léger dans le but d’optimiser la maîtrise des symptômes et de réduire les exacerbations. Il faut tenir compte du risque d’exacerbations, de l’ampleur des symptômes d’asthme, des degrés d’adhésion et du coût du traitement dans le choix d’une thérapie pour les patients atteints d’un asthme très léger et léger. Conclusion Cet article a pour but de passer brièvement en revue les données probantes et les justifications qui sous-tendent les options de traitement dans les lignes directrices de la SCT, pour aider les médecins à prendre des décisions centrées sur le patient.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.006

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Family PhysicianSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207