MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485126864 · doi:10.1002/9781119266594.ch41

FRAX

2018· other· es· W1485126864 on OpenAlexaff
John А. Kanis, Eugène McCloskey, Nicholas C. Harvey, William D. Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenuePrimer on the metabolic bone diseases and disorders of mineral metabolism · 2018
Typeother
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFRAXMedicineOsteoporosisRisk assessmentHip fractureGold standard (test)Risk management toolsFracture (geology)Osteoporotic fractureInternal medicineComputer scienceBone mineralEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major objective of fracture risk assessment is to enable the targeting of interventions to those at need and avoid unnecessary treatment in those at low risk of fracture. Several risk prediction models have been developed, but the most widely used is the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX). FRAX is a computer-based algorithm that is intended for primary care, calculates fracture probability from easily obtained clinical risk factors in men aged 40 years or more and postmenopausal women. Fracture probability is computed taking into account both the risk of fracture and the risk of death. The use of clinical risk factors alone provides a gradient of risk that lies between 1.4 and 2.1, depending upon age and the type of fracture predicted. FRAX should not be considered as a gold standard in patient assessment, but rather as a reference platform. FRAX has been recommended as a screening tool to detect osteoporosis.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2130.192

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrimer on the metabolic bone diseases and disorders of mineral metabolismSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207