MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1774421951

An editorial on editorials.

2002· editorial· en· W1774421951 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Hoey, Anne Marie Todkill

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceData science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How well do our lead editorials in CMAJ reflect the opinions and sentiments of Canadian physicians? Judging from the feedback we receive, sometimes well, sometimes poorly — assuming that medicine can be fairly represented by any one, cohesive view. Is it our job to represent the filtered view of

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.036

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.346 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainEvaluation
GenreEditorial

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes→French-language works237,207→