MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002899643 · doi:10.1007/s11906-015-0533-5

MEthods of ASsessing blood pressUre: identifying thReshold and target valuEs (MeasureBP): A Review & Study Protocol

2015· review· en· W2002899643 on OpenAlexafffund
Kimberly Blom, Yessica-Haydee Gomez, Norm R.C. Campbell, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, Lyne Cloutier, Donald W. McKay, Martin Dawes, Sheldon W. Tobe, Peter Bolli, Mark Gelfer, Donna McLean, Gillian Bartlett, Lawrence Joseph, Robin Featherstone, Ernesto L. Schiffrin, Stella S. Daskalopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Hypertension Reports · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcMaster UniversityAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresMontreal General HospitalLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHypertension CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Blood pressureMedical physicsData miningComputer scienceInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.016
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.005

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 head0.360
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.158 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Hypertension ReportsSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207