MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994003183 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.090357

The OMERACT-ICF Reference Group: Integrating the ICF into the OMERACT Process: Opportunities and Challenges

2009· article· en· W1994003183 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Annelies Boonen, Gerold Stucki, Walter P. Maksymowych, Anne Christine Rat, Maarten Boers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthMedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At OMERACT 8 in May 2006 in Malta, the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) was introduced as a universal model and a universal classification to describe human functioning. The potential usefulness of the ICF for the OMERACT process was highlighted and reported in a position paper following the OMERACT 8 meeting. Since then representatives of several OMERACT working groups with an interest in the ICF joined an OMERACT-ICF reference group. Most members had experience with the ICF and worked further to integrate the ICF into OMERACT. We describe the main roles of the ICF in the OMERACT process and the challenges when practice confronts theory.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207