{"id":"W3196745167","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.030","title":"Making sense of harms and benefits: Assessing the numeric presentation of risk information in ACOG obstetrical clinical practice guidelines","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Patient Education and Counseling","topic":"Clinical practice guidelines implementation","field":"Medicine","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Absolute risk reduction; Medicine; Presentation (obstetrics); Risk assessment; Baseline (sea); Relative risk; Comprehension; Risk communication; Absolute (philosophy); Clinical Practice; Risk management; Family medicine; Risk analysis (engineering); Obstetrics; Environmental health; Confidence interval; Computer science; Business; Political science","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02482042,0.0008025079,0.003656063,0.003963463,0.000588771,0.003742895,0.001876227,0.002273829,0.003221936],"category_scores_gemma":[0.132724,0.0007896018,0.002930041,0.00482848,0.001205246,0.003414317,0.001860083,0.003934254,0.0003230076],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003611994,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0135047,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01514352,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05307208,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9685646,0.01718003,0.005151808,0.000803553,0.007965408,0.0003346921],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8998057,0.07935567,0.0109341,0.0008453283,0.008443707,0.0006154851],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"methods","domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002420444,0.0001034135,0.003178954,0.1559401,0.002615054,0.00007045177,0.0009580828,0.0002047185,0.0001020293,0.002366501,0.008414422,0.8258042],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005721806,0.0003725196,0.01909455,0.7892927,0.01571433,0.0006750572,0.001785927,0.0008216005,0.0003798157,0.004860217,0.166199,0.0002322565],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.001239293,0.9931781,0.0005026585,0.003224977,0.0002996345,0.0001771957,0.000102398,0.00001043776,0.001265203],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.01810456,0.9707845,0.00760862,0.002751983,0.0002341459,0.0002187479,0.0001150161,0.000006537641,0.0001758977],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9751796,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1312646,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.3676651435800617,"score_gpt":0.5884806310886436,"score_spread":0.2208154875085818,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}