MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545880965 · doi:10.1002/mpr.356

Quality assessment of observational studies in psychiatry: an example from perinatal psychiatric research

2011· article· en· W1545880965 on OpenAlexafffund
Lori E. Ross, Sophie Grigoriadis, Lana Mamisashvili, Gideon Koren, Meir Steiner, Cindy‐Lee Dennis, Amy Cheung, Patricia Mousmanis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsCollege of Family Physicians of CanadaWomen's College HospitalMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreSickKids FoundationSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsObservational studyPsychiatrySystematic reviewRandomized controlled trialQuality (philosophy)PsychologyObservational methods in psychologyMedicineMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In perinatal psychiatry, randomized controlled trials are often not feasible on ethical grounds. Many studies are observational in nature, while others employ large databases not designed primarily for research purposes. Quality assessment of the resulting research is complicated by a lack of standardized tools specifically for this purpose. The aim of this paper is to describe the Systematic Assessment of Quality in Observational Research (SAQOR), a quality assessment tool our team devised for a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evidence-based literature regarding risks and benefits of antidepressant medication during pregnancy.

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)0.662
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.829
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.6620.829
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0140.020
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.777
GPT teacher head0.686
Teacher spread0.090 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations103
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric ResearchSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207