MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W844108420 · doi:10.4414/smw.2001.09738

Transplantation or islets of Langerhans: new developments

2001· review· en· W844108420 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Caulfield, José Oberholzer, Rodolfo Alejandro, DKC Cooper, C Ricordi

Bibliographic record

VenueSwiss Medical Weekly · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIsletXenotransplantationTransplantationImmunosuppressionStem cellDiabetes mellitusImmunologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical results recently reported by the Edmonton group in recipients of allogeneic islet grafts, all of whom achieved at least temporary insulin independence, has rekindled interest in transplantation of islets of Langerhans as a means to cure diabetes. Long-term islet graft survival has been achieved in a non-human primate pre-clinical model with a protocol of T-cell signaling blockade using a new monoclonal antibody. Islet xenotransplantation (namely the use of animal islets, with the aim of transplanting them into humans), or stem cell technology (the controlled differentiation of stem cells to obtain specialised cells for the treatment of diabetes) are other procedures currently being evaluated in animal models. The recent clinical success suggests that, in the near future, diabetes might be treated by islet transplantation early in the clinical course of the disease before the development of complications, and without the risks associated with conventional immunosuppression.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
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

Citations34
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSwiss Medical WeeklySame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207