MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404199222 · doi:10.1186/s13023-024-03402-8

Brain and lung arteriovenous malformation rescreening practices for children and adults with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia

2024· article· en· W4404199222 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren A. Beslow, Helen Kim, Steven W. Hetts, Félix Ratjen, Marianne S. Clancy, James R. Gossage, Marie E. Faughnan

Bibliographic record

VenueOrphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Anomalies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeRare Diseases Clinical Research NetworkNational Institutes of HealthChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia
KeywordsTelangiectasiaArteriovenous malformationMedicineLungPediatricsPathologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) are at risk for organ vascular malformations including arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) in the brain and lungs. North American HHT Centers of Excellence (CoEs) routinely screen for brain and lung AVMs, with the primary goal of detecting AVMs which can be treated before complications arise. Current international HHT guidelines provide recommendations for initial screening for brain and lung AVMs among children and adults with the disease, but rescreening recommendations are not comprehensively addressed and have not been reported. We determined current rescreening practices for brain and lung AVMs for children and adults with HHT among North American HHT CoEs. METHODS: We surveyed North American HHT CoEs regarding rescreening practices for new brain and lung AVMs in children and adults with initial negative screening. RESULTS: All thirty CoEs responded; 28 regarding pediatric (93.3%) and 30 (100%) regarding adult HHT care. The median duration of practice experience in HHT was 11.5 (range 3-30) years for providers of pediatric HHT care and 11.5 (range 3-35) years for providers of adult HHT care. The median number of patients followed at each CoE was 60 for children (range 8-500) and 375 for adults (range 30-1500). 25/28 CoEs (89.3%) reported rescreening children for brain AVMs, most commonly with enhanced MRI (21/25, 84%). 25 CoEs rescreen children for lung AVMs, most commonly every 5 years (15/25). Only 4/30 CoEs (13.3%) rescreen adults for brain AVMs. 26/30 CoEs (86.7%) reported rescreening adults for lung AVMs, most commonly every 5 years (18/26, 69.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Most HHT CoEs routinely rescreen children for brain and lung AVMs and adults for lung AVMs when initial screening is negative, but adults are infrequently rescreened for brain AVMs. Long-term data regarding risk for new brain and lung AVMs are required to establish practice guidelines for rescreening.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrphanet Journal of Rare DiseasesSame topicVascular Anomalies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207