MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392552755 · doi:10.1183/13993003.02302-2023

A proposed approach to pulmonary long COVID: a viewpoint

2024· letter· en· W4392552755 on OpenAlexafffund
Firoozeh V. Gerayeli, Rachel L. Eddy, Don D. Sin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchReseau canadien de recherche respiratoireMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Pneumonia2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndromeCoronavirusRespiratory systemDiseaseRespiratory diseaseBetacoronavirusIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicineLungVirologyOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long COVID (also known as “post-acute sequelae of COVID-19”) is a multi-system disorder that follows an acute bout of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection [1]. Although its exact prevalence is unknown, it is estimated to affect approximately 10% of SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals, though in reality the percentage is likely much higher owing to under-reporting of cases [1]. The prevalence is elevated in patients who have had acute SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia requiring hospitalization and lower in those who have been previously vaccinated or were infected with the Omicron variant [1]. In approximately 6% of the cases of long COVID, pulmonary symptoms such as dyspnea, cough and wheeziness are prominent, leading to considerable disability and morbidity [2, 3]. While it is attractive to view long COVID as one disease, it is likely a very complex, heterogeneous disorder, with multiple different phenotypes, each driven by a unique set of molecules and pathways [1].

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0340.040
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207