MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005805479 · doi:10.3810/pgm.2004.04.1481

Is there an easy way to diagnose migraine?

2004· article· en· W2005805479 on OpenAlexaff
John Edmeads

Bibliographic record

VenuePostgraduate Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMedicineHeadachesPrimary careMigraine DisordersPrimary headacheFamily medicinePediatricsPhysical therapyIntensive care medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Migraine is an important issue in primary care medicine because surveys in North America consistently show that about 6% of men and 18% of women experience these recurrent and often debilitating headaches. Of those identified by surveyors as having migraine, only about 60% had consulted a physician about their headaches, and less than half of these patients reported having received a medical diagnosis of migraine.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.008

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 head0.343
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePostgraduate MedicineSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207