MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024677182 · doi:10.1007/s11999-015-4287-9

Network Meta-analysis: Users’ Guide for Surgeons: Part II - Certainty

2015· article· en· W2024677182 on OpenAlexaff
Harman Chaudhry, Clary J. Foote, Gordon Guyatt, Lehana Thabane, Toshi A. Furukawa, Brad Petrisor, Mohit Bhandari

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCertaintyCredibilityMeta-analysisEvidence-based medicineOrthopedic surgeryMEDLINEMedical physicsSurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the previous article (Network Meta-analysis: Users' Guide for Surgeons-Part I, Credibility), we presented an approach to evaluating the credibility or methodologic rigor of network meta-analyses (NMA), an innovative approach to simultaneously addressing the relative effectiveness of three or more treatment options for a given medical condition or disease state. In the second part of the Users' Guide for Surgeons, we discuss and demonstrate the application of criteria for determining the certainty in effect sizes and directions associated with a given treatment option through an example pertinent to clinical orthopaedics.

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.537
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.537
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.009
Bibliometrics0.0160.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0090.007
Research integrity0.0100.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.047

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 head0.946
GPT teacher head0.655
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207