MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1965274991 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2014-5319

Abstract 5319: The role of ISBER (The International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories) in cancer research

2014· article· en· W1965274991 on OpenAlexaff
Debra Leiolani Garcia, Katherine C. Sexton, William E. Grizzle, Fay Betsou

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsInternational Society for Cellular Therapy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiorepositoryStandardizationMedicineCitationLibrary scienceBiobankPolitical scienceComputer scienceBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract High quality biospecimen collections are essential for biomarker discovery in Cancer Research. Biomarker analytical and clinical performance depends heavily upon the pre-analytical variation of biospecimens used. For this reason, standardization of procedures is of utmost importancein the collection, preparation, and storageof biospecimens, making it possible to accurately associateprocessing methods withappropriate end-use applications. The International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) is a professional society of organizations and individuals who share an interest in promoting consistent, high quality standards, ethical principles, and Best Practices in biospecimen banking. ISBER, with almost 500 individual and organizational members throughout the world, is the leading international forum for promoting innovation in the science and management of biospecimen collection, processing, storage, distribution, and use. ISBER educational resources and meetings focus on a wide variety of topics from biorepository development, maintenance, and improvement, to technical concerns regarding equipment, quality assurance and control, regulation, human subject privacy, and confidentiality. Additional tools developed by ISBER, many of which are web-based, are available to assist researchers in ensuring biospecimen quality and biorepository compliance with Best Practices. ISBER routinely provides information about existing biorepositories and their biospecimen collections as well. For more information, please visit http://www.ISBER.org. Citation Format: Debra L. Garcia, Katherine Sexton, William E. Grizzle, Fay Betsou. The role of ISBER (The International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories) in cancer research. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 5319. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-5319

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)0.126
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.125
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1260.125
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0250.017
Open science0.0060.018
Research integrity0.0100.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1030.056

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 head0.500
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.120 · 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
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicEthics in Clinical Research→French-language works237,207→