MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046311115 · doi:10.1038/sc.2012.19

An evidence-based review on the influence of aging with a spinal cord injury on subjective quality of life

2012· review· en· W2046311115 on OpenAlexafffund
Brodie M. Sakakibara, Sander L. Hitzig, William C. Miller, Janice J. Eng

Bibliographic record

VenueSpinal Cord · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchToronto Rehabilitation InstituteOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareRick Hansen InstituteOntario Neurotrauma FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryData extractionQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMEDLINEGerontologyEvidence-based medicineSpinal cordPsychiatryAlternative medicinePathology

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.369
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSpinal CordSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207