MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073820187

The laboratory diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis: Guidelines from the Canadian Public Health Laboratory Network

2007· article· en· W7073820187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear Optics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLyme borreliosisLyme diseasePublic healthLYMEBorreliaMedical laboratory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lyme borreliosis is uncommonly seen in Canada. Most cases have occurred in close proximity to small geographical areas where infected ticks have become established. Although few cases are seen, thousands of patients are tested yearly. Unless patients are carefully selected and an appropriately sensitive and specific testing algorithm is applied, large numbers of patients without Lyme borreliosis will be incorrectly diagnosed. The Canadian Public Health Laboratory Network has developed the present guidelines to assist physicians in assessing patients for Lyme borreliosis, and to help guide the choice and interpretation of laboratory testing.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear OpticsFrench-language works237,207