MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394531781 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.5909788

Supplementary Material for: The Importance of Excluding Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphomas in Patients with a Working Diagnosis of Papuloerythroderma of Ofuji: A Case Series

2018· dataset· en· W4394531781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthony Maher, C. E. W. Ward, Steven J. Glassman, Ivan V. Litvinov

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2018
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous lymphoproliferative disorders research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)DermatologyMedicineBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Papuloerythroderma of Ofuji (PEO) is an erythroderma-like eruption with flat-topped papules that spare the skin folds (a “deck-chair sign” finding). Many infections, medications, and systemic diseases have been associated with PEO, including cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCL). The relationship between the clinical presentation of PEO and CTCL remains poorly elucidated. Clinical, laboratory, and histopathological data were obtained from the Lymphoma Clinic at the Ottawa Hospital, Canada. We report 5 patients with deck-chair-sign-positive CTCL, mycosis fungoides, and Sézary syndrome variants. We contend that PEO should be viewed as a diagnosis of exclusion and that these patients should be monitored carefully for possible emergence of CTCL. Skin biopsy alone is not sufficient to exclude CTCL in these patients. A skin eruption demonstrating a positive deck-chair sign may signify systemic/leukemic CTCL and, therefore, warrants a thorough investigation, including skin biopsy, flow cytometry, and T-cell receptor clonality studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2830.047

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicCutaneous lymphoproliferative disorders researchFrench-language works237,207