MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405843988 · doi:10.1016/j.ejcped.2024.100210

European standard clinical practice recommendations for paediatric high-grade gliomas

2024· article· en· W4405843988 on OpenAlexaff
Elwira Szychot, G Giraud, Darren Hargrave, Dannis van Vuurden, Jacques Grill, Veronica Biassoni, Maura Massimino, André O. Von Büren, Rejin Kebudi, Maria João Gil‐da‐Costa, Sophie E. M. Veldhuijzen van Zanten, Simon Bailey, Michael Karremann, Stéphanie Bolle, Thankamma Ajithkumar, Mechthild Krause, Yasmin Lassen–Ramshad, Geert O. Janssens, Giovanni Morana, Ulrike Löbel, Shivaram Avula, Brigitte Bison, Maarten H. Lequin, Kristian Aquilina, Ulrich W. Thomale, Pelle Nilsson, Sami Bui Quy Abu Hamdeh, Torsten Pietsch, Pascale Varlet, Thomas S. Jacques, Pieter Wesseling, David Jones, Uri Tabori, Anirban Das, David C. Mulligan, Francesca Kozmann, Christof M. Kramm

Bibliographic record

VenueEJC Paediatric Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research CentreGreat Ormond Street Hospital for ChildrenBrain Tumour CharityGreat Ormond Street Hospital CharityCHILDREN with CANCER UKGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity College LondonCancer Research UK
KeywordsClinical PracticeMedicineMedical physicsPediatricsFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h2>Abstract</h2> Paediatric high-grade gliomas (pedHGGs) are highly invasive brain tumours accounting for approximately 15 % of all central nervous system (CNS) tumours in children and adolescents. The outcome for these tumours is generally poor with 5-year survival rates of less than 20 %. Despite improved biological insights into pedHGGs and the promise of more effective therapies, little progress has been made in the effective treatment and the outcome of these tumours over the last four decades. Much of the evidence for the use of chemotherapy in pedHGGs is extrapolated from adult data, and the evidence for its use in the paediatric population is still weak. This guideline was written by members of the SIOPE HGG Working Group as part of the European Standard Clinical Practice (ESCP) Project of the European Reference Network for Paediatric Oncology, ERN PaedCan. The guideline aims to integrate available evidence-based and expert opinion-based information to assist healthcare professionals in the management of pedHGGs and in an attempt to provide equity in healthcare reflecting the varying resources of each European country.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEJC Paediatric OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207