MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014110355 · doi:10.2337/diacare.27.3.849

How to Implement Evidence Into Practice to Improve Diabetes Care

2004· letter· en· W2014110355 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tipu Faiz Saleem

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Diabetes Association
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesDisease managementMEDLINEDiabetes managementClinical PracticeEvidence-based medicineIntensive care medicineFamily medicineEvidence-based practiceDiseaseNursingAlternative medicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their article, Ilag et al. (1) used the Annual Diabetes Assessment Program (ADAP) as a model to improve the standard of care for patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite established guidelines for type 2 diabetes, the majority of patients in the U.S. do not reach these goals (2). Various approaches have been used, including disease management programs, physician education, nurse case management, and use of information systems to translate evidence-based recommendations into clinical practice (3). …

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)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.279
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.279
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.019
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0500.047
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 venueDiabetes CareSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207