MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990681363 · doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9793-3

Patterns of reporting health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized clinical trials: implications for clinicians and quality of life researchers

2010· review· en· W1990681363 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Brundage, Brenda Bass, Judith Davidson, John Queenan, Andrea Bezjak, Jolie Ringash, Anna N. Wilkinson, Deb Feldman‐Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoKingston General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEConcordanceQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical trialFamily medicineSystematic reviewSurgeryNursingInternal medicine

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)0.673
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.917
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.6730.917
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.016
Bibliometrics0.0150.024
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.992
GPT teacher head0.817
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designSystematic review
DomainReporting
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

Citations150
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207