MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117251450 · doi:10.1002/alz70857_101939

Communication of prognosis to patient with PSP and family

2025· article· en· W7117251450 on OpenAlexaff
Juan‐Camilo Vargas‐González, Ignacio Flores, Carmela M Tartaglia, Indira García‐Cordero, Alonso Morales‐Rivero, Raúl Medina Rioja, Blas Couto

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgressive supranuclear palsyDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Advance care planningSwallowingCorticobasal degeneration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prognosis of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and corticobasal syndrome (CBS) involves a survival shorter than 10-years since symptom onset with development of marked disability. Patients will often progress to require increased assisstance with daily living activities, and symptomatic therapies with partial effectiveness that lead to experiencing decreased quality of life. Speech difficulties and swallowing problems dictate the moderate to severe stages of the disease course adding complexity to the daily care of patients with PSP and CBS. Altogether, these create a huge burden that impacts directly to the patient family and caregivers. Communicating prognosis at each timepoint of the disease is crucial for care planning and making future life decisions. In this session, we will provide clinicians with information and skills to communicate prognosis of tauopathies with an accertive and patient-centered approach.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→