MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024822134 · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.07.001

Menopause: evidence-based practice

2006· review· en· W2024822134 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Blake

Bibliographic record

VenueBest Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMenopauseEstrogenBreast cancerRandomized controlled trialProgestinEndometrial hyperplasiaEndometrial cancerGynecologyObservational studyHormone replacement therapy (female-to-male)Hormone therapyObstetricsCancerInternal medicineOncologyEndometriumTestosterone (patch)

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.006
Bibliometrics0.0160.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.457
GPT teacher head0.604
Teacher spread0.147 · 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
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

Citations76
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBest Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & GynaecologySame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207