MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022847020 · doi:10.1007/s11136-013-0402-0

Guidelines for secondary analysis in search of response shift

2013· article· en· W2022847020 on OpenAlexafffund
Carolyn E. Schwartz, Sara Ahmed, Richard Sawatzky, Tolulope T. Sajobi, Nancy E. Mayo, Joel Finkelstein, Lisa M. Lix, Mathilde G. E. Verdam, Frans J. Oort, Mirjam A. G. Sprangers

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreTrinity Western UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryCentre for Health Evaluation and Outcome SciencesWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsParadigm shiftResponse timeSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceResponse analysisData setData miningChecklistArtificial intelligencePsychologyMedicineCognitive psychology

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)0.344
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.684
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3440.684
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.020
Bibliometrics0.0160.014
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0080.007
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1750.063

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 head0.460
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.099 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicSleep and Work-Related FatigueFrench-language works237,207