MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964981296 · doi:10.1136/bmj.39428.470752.ad

Shifting the focus in fracture prevention from osteoporosis to falls

2008· review· en· W1964981296 on OpenAlexaff
Teppo L. N. Järvinen, Harri Sievänen, Karim M. Khan, Ari Heinonen, Pekka Kannus

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoporosisFocus (optics)MedicineFall preventionFracture (geology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyPsychologyInjury preventionPoison controlMedical emergencyEngineeringInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preventing fractures in older people is important. But Teppo Järvinen and colleagues believe that we should be putting our efforts into stopping falls not treating low bone mineral density

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.350 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations405
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207