MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research

2009· review· en· W2007591654 on OpenAlexafffund
Iveta Simera, David Moher, J. Hoey, Kenneth F. Schulz, Douglas G. Altman

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEquatorTransparency (behavior)Reliability (semiconductor)Data collectionPublic relationsMedical educationBusinessMedicineComputer sciencePolitical scienceGeographySociologyComputer securitySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing evidence demonstrates widespread deficiencies in the reporting of health research studies. The EQUATOR Network is an international initiative that aims to enhance the reliability and value of the published health research literature. EQUATOR provides resources, education and training to facilitate good research reporting and assists in the development, dissemination and implementation of robust reporting guidelines. This paper presents a collection of tools and guidelines available on the EQUATOR website (http://www.equator-network.org) that have been developed to increase the accuracy and transparency of health research reporting.

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)0.197
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.479
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1970.479
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.008
Bibliometrics0.0470.058
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0120.008
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.071

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 head0.994
GPT teacher head0.791
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations1,048
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207