MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046788478 · doi:10.1002/hast.347

We Need Both Evidence and Values to Navigate Uncertainty

2014· letter· en· W2046788478 on OpenAlexaff
Ross Upshur

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Hastings Center Report · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical ethicsEnvironmental ethicsPsychologyLawPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A commentary on "Ethics and Evidence in Medical Debates: The Case of Recombinant Activated Factor VII," by Narcyz Ghinea, Wendy Lipworth, Ian Kerridge, Miles Little, and Richard O. Day, in the March-April 2014 issue.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.219
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.219
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.046
Scholarly communication0.0190.031
Open science0.0100.010
Research integrity0.1290.146
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Hastings Center ReportSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207