MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1504392500 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.109-5053

Is withholding clinical trial results “research misconduct”?

2015· article· en· W1504392500 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roger Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScientific misconductClinical trialMedical researchData scienceMisconductComputer scienceMedical educationAlternative medicineMedicineEngineering ethicsPathologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the purpose of medical research? To advance medical science and improve human health? Or to advance research careers and improve industry bottom lines? Because if it’s the former, it makes no sense that the results of many clinical trials go unreported, say advocates for greater

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaMetaresearchResearch integrity
Domain: Methods · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
gptMetaresearchResearch integrity
Domain: Reporting · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.558
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.558
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.627
GPT teacher head0.586
Teacher spread0.041 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods · Reporting
GenreCommentary

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsCategoryMetaresearchFrench-language works237,207