MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983095919 · doi:10.1136/bmj.f2838

The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomised trials: precis for researchers and research ethics committees

2013· article· en· W1983095919 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer, Jeremy Grimshaw, M P Eccles

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsStatement (logic)Research ethicsEngineering ethicsEthics committeeConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsResearch designCluster randomised controlled trialPolitical scienceAlternative medicineClinical trialMedicinePsychologyMEDLINERandomized controlled trialSociologyLawEngineeringSocial sciencePublic administrationPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cluster randomised trials have unique features that complicate the application of standard ethics guidelines for research. The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomised trials was developed to provide detailed guidance to researchers, research ethics committees, regulators, and sponsors as they seek to fulfil their respective roles. This article describes the development of the Ottawa Statement and outlines key implications for researchers and research ethics committees.

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)0.398
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.568
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3980.568
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0080.023
Scholarly communication0.0160.006
Open science0.0090.008
Research integrity0.0280.045
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.011

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 head0.906
GPT teacher head0.700
Teacher spread0.207 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations93
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207