MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407848310 · doi:10.4193/rhin24.457

Remission in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

2025· article· en· W4407848310 on OpenAlexaff
Peter W. Hellings, Eugenio De Corso, Vibeke Backer, Manuel Bernal‐Sprekelsen, Yi Tao Chan, Diego M. Conti, Marjolein Cornet, W. J. Fokkens, Philippe Gevaert, J Han, Claire Hopkins, Basile N. Landis, Susanne Lau, Stephanie J. Lee, V J Lund, J Mullol, Albert J. Peters, Sven Schneider, Brent A. Senior

Bibliographic record

VenueRhinology Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhinologyMedicineNasal polypsChronic rhinosinusitisDermatologyVisual analogue scalePosition paperInternal medicinePhysical therapyIntensive care medicineSurgeryOtorhinolaryngologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remission has recently been proposed as the new goal of care in CRSwNP or Nasal Polyp Syndrome by the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases / European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EUFOREA/EPOS) (1,2) as well as by global leaders in Rhinology (3). In CRSwNP, remission is defined as a prolonged state of control, without bothersome symptoms reported by the patient for at least 12 months, without the need for either oral corticosteroids or endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), and without endoscopic signs of active disease (1). This new goal of care is to be encouraged by the ENT community and CRSwNP patients as persistent symptoms unalleviated by historical approaches (4,5) can be reduced by new therapies including biologics. The goal of therapy for CRSwNP has long been to achieve control, with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores guiding physicians towards a step-up treatment aiming for control (6,7).

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRhinology JournalSame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207