MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989839050 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.115-0005

Too much focus on low-quality science?

2015· letter· en· W1989839050 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Norm R.C. Campbell, Mary R. L’Abbé, E.W. McHenry

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSodium Intake and Health
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Promotion (chess)Duration (music)Focus (optics)SodiumComputer scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthChemistryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The controversy concerning dietary sodium results primarily from low-quality studies and their commercial marketing and promotion.[1][1]–[5][2] Low-quality studies do not adequately assess sodium intake, they use extreme variation in dietary sodium and they measure outcomes over a duration of a

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)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.307
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.307
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.028
Scholarly communication0.0170.031
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0640.093
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.011

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreCommentary

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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicSodium Intake and HealthFrench-language works237,207