MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059870401 · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2012.11.032

2012 Update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dyslipidemia for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in the Adult

2013· review· en· W2059870401 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Todd J. Anderson, Jean Grégoire, Robert A. Hegele, Patrick Couture, G.B. John Mancini, Ruth McPherson, Gordon A. Francis, Paul Poirier, David C.W. Lau, Steven A. Grover, Jacques Genest, André C. Carpentier, Robert Dufour, Milan Gupta, Richard Ward, Lawrence A. Leiter, Eva Lonn, Dominic S. Ng, Glen J. Pearson, Gillian Yates, James A. Stone, Ehud Ur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Cardiology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentrePopulation Health Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecSt. Paul's HospitalMontreal Clinical Research InstituteCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of OttawaLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversité LavalMcMaster UniversityRobarts Clinical TrialsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDyslipidemiaDiseaseFramingham Risk ScoreIntensive care medicineStatinRisk assessmentPopulationKidney diseasePhysical therapyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.343
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; 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

Citations774
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CardiologySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207