MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966473476 · doi:10.1075/idj.15.1.07fra

Medical communications and information design

2007· article· en· W1966473476 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge Frascara, Stan Ruecker

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Design Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Computer scienceMedical informationKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An organization of pharmacists requested our services to improve the design of their printed communications to medical doctors, concerning the use of pharmaceutical drugs. Departing from a design process model developed by the Communication Research Institute of Australia, we selected an existing document, interviewed users, defined the objectives of the document, established performance benchmarks, produced a new prototype, and tested it. Results indicated that memory of the contents had improved in accuracy, and that the time required for search-and-find tasks had been substantially cut. The article describes the process followed and outlines future research to be undertaken.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Design JournalSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207