MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068428412 · doi:10.1108/00907320410519423

Research, development, and production of information resources and tools

2005· article· en· W2068428412 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueReference Services Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityValue (mathematics)InformaticsMedical educationInformation literacyWork (physics)Quality (philosophy)Health informaticsRelevance (law)Critical appraisalProfessional developmentComputer scienceKnowledge managementPsychologySociologyLibrary scienceMedicinePolitical scienceNursingAlternative medicineQualitative researchEngineeringSocial sciencePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The Health Information Research Unit (HIRU) at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, was founded to meet the information needs that were quickly becoming apparent in the course of teaching critical appraisal methods for the practice of evidence‐based medicine. Librarians have worked in HIRU from its inception and their activities include teaching searching skills to clinicians, collecting and analyzing data for developing methods hedges to increase retrieval of high‐quality clinical articles, evaluating study methods of articles for four evidence‐based journals, and developing more sophisticated ways to deliver electronic information to clinicians. This article summarizes these developments. Design/methodology/approach To show the range and richness of the roles performed over the years, some of the cycles and projects with which HIRU has been involved and how librarians have fit in are described. Not all projects have been “successful”, but often the unsuccessful ones are as informative as – if not more so than – those that met one's expectations. Findings One of the main outcomes of the work is the recognition that many job opportunities in areas of informatics exist for librarians and other information professionals. Other groups are acknowledging that librarians can have substantial input into information products and anyone considering health sciences librarianship as a career should realize that many of the skills obtained during training will equip one for work in many non‐traditional settings. Originality/value It is felt that a contribution has been made to the continuing education of many of one's peers and help given to build one's research base and information products. The professional relationships that have been established because of these interactions have been rich and rewarding. Anyone interested in a career in health librarianship is encouraged to consider the opportunities available in research and development and other non‐traditional (non‐library) settings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.240 · 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