MétaCan
ENFR
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.

Export CSVExport JSONAPI query

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
Transfusion
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.

1,250 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.
1,250 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 25 of 25

Labels cover 2 of 1,250 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 1,250 of 1,250 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.

aboutno affunlabeled
Is longer better?
Jay E. Menitove
2015· letter· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Is it time for a new standard?
Michael Auerbach, P. Justin Tortolani
2014· editorial· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
To Fe, or not to Fe
Merlyn Sayers
2017· editorial· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affunlabeled
Balancing agendas in donor testing
Michael E. Lamb
2009· editorial· en· Transfusion· Business, Management and Accounting
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Betwixt Scylla and Charybdis
Jed B. Gorlin
2012· letter· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
The lost (to follow‐up) intervention
Bartolomeu Nascimento, Sandro Rizoli, Jeannie Callum
2011· letter· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
P‐CB‐1 | What's in a Blood Bag? Exposome 2.0
Travis Nemkov, David D. Stephenson, Mars Stone, Steven Kleinman, Michael P. Busch, Pauline Norris +1 more
2023· article· en· Transfusion· Environmental Science
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affunlabeled
Reply
Nancy M. Heddle
2003· article· en· Transfusion· Medicine
machine prediction:candidate · insufficient_payloadconsensus · none
0
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Kathleen Gagliardi
2012· letter· en· Transfusion· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
aboutno affunlabeled
Erratum
2023· erratum· en· Transfusion· Business, Management and Accounting
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
affunlabeled
Working together
Roger Y. Dodd, Irene Zielinski
2003· article· en· Transfusion· Business, Management and Accounting
machine prediction:candidate · insufficient_payloadconsensus · none
0
citations
← previous

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About