MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systematic reviews can be produced and published faster

2008· article· en· W2070877465 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret Sampson, Kaveh G Shojania, Chantelle Garritty, Tanya Horsley, Mary Ocampo, David Moher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsSystematic reviewMEDLINEMedicineJournal clubGrey literatureQuartileScopusInterquartile rangePsychological interventionLibrary scienceFamily medicineMedical educationComputer sciencePolitical scienceSurgeryConfidence interval

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)0.138
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.448
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1380.448
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.013
Bibliometrics0.0760.056
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0320.034
Open science0.0070.012
Research integrity0.0140.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5370.383

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 head0.942
GPT teacher head0.661
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations104
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207