MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Time-dependent bias was common in survival analyses published in leading clinical journals

2004· review· en· W1982831088 on OpenAlexaff
Carl van Walraven, Darryl R. Davis, Alan J. Forster, George A. Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyMedicinePublication biasCovariateAnnalsMeta-analysisBaseline (sea)MEDLINENew englandSurvival analysisDemographyInternal medicineStatisticsHistory

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.920
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.927
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.9200.927
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.1380.042
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0090.001
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.981
GPT teacher head0.772
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations339
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207