MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1888340530 · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000000161

Quality Assessment Errors and Study Misclassification Threaten Systematic Review Validity

2015· letter· en· W1888340530 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Orkin, Katherine Bingham, Jason E. Buick, Michelle Klaiman, Pamela Leece, Fiona G. Kouyoumdjian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Addiction Medicine · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orkin, Aaron M. MD, MSc, MPH; Bingham, Katherine MD, MSc; Buick, Jason Eric MSc, PCP; Klaiman, Michelle MD, FRCPC; Leece, Pamela MD, MSc; Kouyoumdjian, Fiona MD, MPH, PhD Author Information

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)0.365
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.810
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3650.810
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0320.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.859
GPT teacher head0.595
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Addiction MedicineSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207