MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038965113 · doi:10.1080/14647270600917263

Using evidence from randomized trials in fertility practice

2007· review· en· W2038965113 on OpenAlexaff
Edward G. Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Fertility · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialRelevance (law)External validityTest (biology)FertilityMedicineAlternative medicineIntensive care medicinePsychologyMedical physicsSocial psychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are central to the understanding of treatment effectiveness and diagnostic test utility. If they are to be relied upon in clinical practice, data from trials should have three main attributes: validity (be free from bias); clinical relevance (be based on patients similar to your own, reporting outcomes that matter to them); and importance (demonstrate effect sizes that are large enough to justify the costs and risks entailed). With these principles in mind, this brief article reviews key questions to pose while deciding whether new evidence from RCTs should influence subfertility patient care.

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)0.121
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.348
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1210.348
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.007
Bibliometrics0.0140.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.560
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.015 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman FertilitySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207