Interrater Reliability of the Modified Jadad Quality Scale for Systematic Reviews of Alzheimer’s Disease Drug Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been evaluated in clinical trials over the past 2 decades. Systematic reviews of AD drug trials can shed more light on the efficacy of pharmaceutical interventions. The modified Jadad scale can be used to assess the quality of trial reports that are candidates for inclusion in these systematic reviews. The interrater reliability of the modified Jadad scale was examined during such a review. Three blinded reviewers rated the quality of 42 AD drug trial reports: the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.90. The modified Jadad scale appears to be a useful tool for AD research because of the very good interrater reliability. Also, it is composed of items that are well suited to the specific disease characteristics of AD. Further research should focus on the validity of this instrument.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.508 | 0.714 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".