MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W96342227 · doi:10.1056/nejmc070182

Lapatinib plus Capecitabine in Breast Cancer

2007· letter· en· W96342227 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guru Sonpavde

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapecitabineLapatinibMedicineBreast cancerMetastatic breast cancerOncologyInternal medicineCancerPharmacologyTrastuzumabColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

n engl j med 356;14 www.nejm.org april 5, 2007 1471 cies. Nonstandardized empirical antibiotic therapy has confounded the interpretation of findings in some previous trials of the diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Therefore, the initial antibiotic therapy in our trial, consisting of meropenem with or without ciprofloxacin, served to standardize empirical treatment until culture results became available. Patients with known pathogens not susceptible to these drugs were excluded; thus, differences observed in outcomes could be better attributed to the diagnostic strategy. It is important not to interpret the use of these antibiotics as clinical recommendations for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia. The treatment guidelines of the American Thoracic Society were published after our trial had been completed.1 Daren Heyland, M.D. Queen’s University Kingston, ON K7L 2V7, Canada dkh2@post.queensu.ca

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)0.003
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207