MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966643448 · doi:10.1016/j.aap.2013.07.007

The Candrive/Ozcandrive prospective older driver study: Methodology and early study findings

2013· editorial· en· W1966643448 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shawn Marshall, Malcolm Man‐Son‐Hing, Judith Charlton, Lisa J. Molnar, Sjaan Koppel, David W. Eby

Bibliographic record

VenueAccident Analysis & Prevention · 2013
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and healthPoison controlGovernment (linguistics)Suicide preventionInjury preventionEngineeringGerontologyCohort studyOlder peopleTransport engineeringEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0150.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAccident Analysis & PreventionSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207