MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999162487

Changing concepts of Immunodeficiencies: primary immunodeficiencies in the adult

2010· dissertation· en· W6999162487 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohortDiseaseImmune systemAffect (linguistics)Cohort study
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'Immunodéficience Primaire (IDP) est définie comme étant un défaut génétique du système immunitaire. Plus de 200 types d'IDPs ont été découverts; entre autre grâce à la prise de conscience de l'incidence de ces maladies et au perfectionnement des techniques de détection. Plusieurs changements de paradigme sont survenus dans le domaine des IDPs. Cette revue de littérature tente à mettre en évidence ces changements de paradigme par le biais d'exemples pertinents. Par exemple, il a été démontré que les adultes peuvent aussi être affectés par ces maladies plus que reconnu précédemment. Jusqu'à ce jour, peu d'analyses ont été effectuées exclusivement sur des cohortes de patients adultes souffrant d'IDPs. Cette thèse décrit le spectre clinique des maladies observées chez 381 patients référés au Centre de Traitement de l'Immunodéficience de l'Hôpital Général de Montréal, et chez qui la présence d'une IDP a été suspectée. Parmi les 381 patients référés, 196 ont été diagnostiqués avec une IDP. Ce manuscrit est en train d' d'être soumis, et représente la première description d'une cohorte de patients adultes souffrant d'IDPs ainsi que la plus large cohorte de ces mêmes patients au Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune DisordersFrench-language works237,207