MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035614178 · doi:10.1007/s00198-010-1482-0

Guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation of fall prevention strategies

2010· article· en· W2035614178 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer C. Davis, M. C. Robertson, Tracy Comans, Paul Scuffham

Bibliographic record

VenueOsteoporosis International · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineEconomic evaluationFall preventionComparabilityCost effectivenessChecklistHealth careCost–benefit analysisIntervention (counseling)Quality-adjusted life yearHealth economicsPoison controlSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthRisk analysis (engineering)NursingPublic healthPsychologyEconomic growth

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)0.252
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.618
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2520.618
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.010
Bibliometrics0.0190.025
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0100.005
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.008

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 head0.277
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainReporting
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

Citations101
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueOsteoporosis InternationalSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207