MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

[Introduction of the key update points of the 2025 Canadian Association for the Study of the Liver guideline for the management of chronic hepatitis B].

2025· other· en· W4413970767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hui Zhuang

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineChronic hepatitisKey (lock)Association (psychology)MedicineVirologyComputer sciencePsychologyPathologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Association for the Study of the Liver and Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada developed jointly the 2025 guidelines for the management of chronic hepatitis B in May 2025. The guidelines updated recommendations for universal adult HBV screening, vaccination, laboratory assessment, treatment, patient-centered care, early diagnosis, expanding antiviral treatment. Notably, the guidelines recommend reflex HDV testing and routine use of quantitative HBsAg for the decision of HBV management.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.025

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→