Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education and debate p 41 As a clinician, I need high quality evidence about the usefulness, precision, and accuracy of diagnostic tests, and I need it now. Such evidence is rare even for the clinical examination, the most critical component of the diagnostic process. 1 2 The situation is getting worse with the exponential increase of diagnostic tests, most of which have never been evaluated properly and can mislead the diagnostic process. Although rigorous methodological standards in research about diagnostic tests have been applied more rigorously in the past decade, their reporting and methodological quality remain inadequate.2–5 Against this background, the proposal in this issue from the authors of Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) for reporting diagnostic research should be applauded (p …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.430 | 0.842 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.045 | 0.041 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.013 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".