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
Animal testing and alternatives
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.

636 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.
636 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 2 of 13

Labels cover 8 of 636 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 636 of 636 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.

affunlabeled
A Belmont Report for Animals?
Hope Ferdowsian, L. Syd M Johnson, Jane Johnson, Andrew Fenton, Adam Shriver, John P. Gluck
2019· article· en· Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics· Veterinary
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
54
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
How valid are claims for synergy in published clinical studies?
Alberto Ocaña, Eitan Amir, Celine Yeung, Boštjan Šeruga, Ian F. Tannock
2012· article· en· Annals of Oncology· Veterinary
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearch+metaepi_narrow+metaepi_broadconsensus · metaresearch
54
citations
affunlabeled
The Future of Toxicity Testing
Melvin E. Andersen, Mustafa Al‐Zoughool, Maxine C. Croteau, Margit Westphal, Daniel Krewski
2010· review· en· Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B· Veterinary
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
53
citations
affunlabeled
Improving animal research reporting standards
Nikki Osborne, Marc T. Avey, Lida Anestidou, Merel Ritskes‐Hoitinga, Gilly Griffin
2018· article· en· EMBO Reports· Veterinary
machine prediction:candidate · metaresearchconsensus · metaresearch
52
citations
affunlabeled
A Good Life for Laboratory Rodents?
I. Joanna Makowska, Daniel M. Weary
2019· review· en· ILAR Journal· Veterinary
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
51
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About