MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032805525 · doi:10.1308/147363505x29014

Balancing risk and quality

2005· article· en· W2032805525 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. Canter, Aidan Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of The Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)BusinessPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June 2004 the College co-hosted a conference with Regent Medical entitled Balancing Risk and Quality in Surgical Education. The aim was to bring together key opinion leaders from Europe and the rest of the world to address the issues raised for surgical education at a time of rapidly changing medical practice, new structures for medical careers and reconfiguration of health services. Regent Medical's very generous support enabled input from many countries: Canada, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, the UK and the USA.

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)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.136
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.136
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.025
Scholarly communication0.0270.017
Open science0.0020.019
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of The Royal College of Surgeons of EnglandSame topicDental Education, Practice, ResearchFrench-language works237,207