MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061554109 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.12.012

Research ethics board approval for an international thromboprophylaxis trial

2012· article· en· W2061554109 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristina Lutz, Kelly Wilton, Nicole Zytaruk, Lisa Julien, Richard Hall, Yoanna Skrobik, Nicholas E. Vlahakis, Laurie Meade, Andrea Matté, Maureen O. Meade, Karen E. A. Burns, Martin Albert, Bronwyn Barlow Cash, Shirley Vallance, James R. Klinger, Diane Heels‐Ansdell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Critical Care · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGroupe canadien de recherche en soins intensifs
KeywordsProtocol (science)RespondentInstitutional review boardMedicineResearch ethicsInformed consentFamily medicineVoluntarinessConsistency (knowledge bases)Interquartile rangeMedical educationAlternative medicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceSurgeryPathologyLaw

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)0.097
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.166
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0970.166
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0160.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.021

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 head0.841
GPT teacher head0.735
Teacher spread0.105 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Critical CareSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207