MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

1,914 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
1,914 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 3 of 39

Labels cover 1,914 of 1,914 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 1,914 of 1,914 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affgemma · research_integritygpt · metaresearch+research_integritymodels split
Ethical Dilemmas in Research on Internet Communities
Sarah Flicker, Dave Haans, Harvey A. Skinner
2004· article· en· Qualitative Health Research· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+research_integrityconsensus · metaresearch
158
citations
afffundgemma · metaresearch+scholarly_communicationgpt · research_integrity+scholarly_communicationmodels split
What is a predatory journal? A scoping review
Kelly D. Cobey, Manoj M. Lalu, Becky Skidmore, Nadera Ahmadzai, Agnes Grudniewicz, David Moher
2018· review· en· F1000Research· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+research_integrityconsensus · none
154
citations
affgemma · metaresearchgpt · metaresearchmodels split
Threats of a replication crisis in empirical computer science
Andy Cockburn, Pierre Dragicevic, Lonni Besançon, Carl Gutwin
2020· article· en· Communications of the ACM· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · metaresearch
153
citations
afffundvenuegemma · metaresearch+bibliometrics+research_integritygpt · metaresearch+bibliometrics+scholarly_communication+research_integritymodels split
How predatory journals leak into PubMed
Andrea Manca, David Moher, Lucia Cugusi, Zeevi Dvir, Franca Deriu
2018· article· en· Canadian Medical Association Journal· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+bibliometrics+research_integrityconsensus · none
146
citations
affgemma · metaresearchgpt · metaresearchmodels agree
Methodologic Issues in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Víctor M. Montori, M.F. Swiontkowski
2003· article· en· Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · metaresearch
144
citations
affgemma · metaresearchgpt · no categorymodels split
An emerging consensus on grading recommendations?
Gordon Guyatt
2006· article· en· Evidence-Based Medicine· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · metaresearch
141
citations
afffundgemma · metaresearch+research_integrity+scholarly_communicationgpt · metaresearch+research_integritymodels split
What is a predatory journal? A scoping review
Kelly D. Cobey, Manoj M. Lalu, Becky Skidmore, Nadera Ahmadzai, Agnes Grudniewicz, David Moher
2018· review· en· F1000Research· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+research_integrityconsensus · none
141
citations
affno abstractgemma · metaresearch+research_integritygpt · research_integritymodels split
Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-analysis of Surveys
Vanja Pupovac, Daniele Fanelli
2014· review· en· Science and Engineering Ethics· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+research_integrityconsensus · none
132
citations
affgpt · metaresearch+metaepi_broadgrok · metaresearch+metaepi_broadopus · metaresearch+metaepi_broadmodels split
Evaluating Meta-analyses in the General Surgical Literature
Elijah Dixon, Morad Hameed, Francis Sutherland, Christopher J. Doig
2005· article· en· Annals of Surgery· Decision Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+metaepi_broadconsensus · none
131
citations
afffundgemma · metaresearchgpt · no categorymodels split
To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review
Janet E. Squires, Alison M. Hutchinson, Anne‐Marie Boström, Hannah M. O’Rourke, Sandra J Cobban, Carole A. Estabrooks
2011· review· en· Implementation Science· Health Professions
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · none
123
citations
afffundgemma · metaresearchgpt · metaresearchmodels split
A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment
Pavel V. Ovseiko, Trisha Greenhalgh, Paula Adam, Jonathan Grant, Saba Hinrichs, Kathryn E. Graham +39 more
2016· article· en· Health Research Policy and Systems· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · metaresearch
122
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About