Bibliographic record
Abstract
of family history, or individuals and families withCalgary, AB, Canada Full list of author information is available at the end of the articleBackground Hereditary diffuse gastric carcinoma is an autosomal dom-inant cancer syndrome accounting for approximately 1 to 3 % of all gastric carcinoma, associated with mutations of the E-cadherin (Cadherin-1; CDH1) gene [1-3]. It is char-acterized by high penetrance with an approximate 80 % life-time risk of developing diffuse gastric carcinoma [2]. Early onset diffuse gastric carcinoma is pathognomonic for HDGC and the natural history is the insidious develop-ment of intramucosal signet ring cell carcinoma in early adulthood progressing to advanced gastric carcinoma by mid-adulthood, at a mean age of 40 years [1]. Female kindreds also have a predisposition for lobular carcinoma of the breast. Established clinical diagnostic criteria for HDGC, as defined by the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium, include: (1) two or more first or second degree relatives with confirmed diffuse (signet ring cell) gastric carcinoma, with at least one diagnosed before 50 years of age; or (2) three or more confirmed cases of diffuse gastric carcinoma amongst first and sec-ond degree relatives, independent of age of onset [4]. Additional clinical indications for genetic testing for CDH1 mutations include: HDGC in two relatives with histologic confirmation of tumor in only one individual, diffuse gastric carcinoma in an individual < 40 years re-
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".