MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Around the World in Eleven Manuscripts

2003· article· en· W2078598929 on OpenAlex
Roy Sanders

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubspecialtyAudience measurementMilestoneLibrary scienceFamily medicineLawHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthopaedic trauma is a growing subspecialty that has its own unique problems. Although a substantial amount of data originates from North America, it is obvious that we are not alone in our struggles to improve patient care in our field. The Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma was started as a means to disseminate this information as an outgrowth of the newly formed Orthopaedic Trauma Association. Although the authors in the past have been predominantly North Americans, the readership has become more and more international in its distribution. Over the last 6 years, the Journal has fostered this relationship with the international community of traumatologists who regularly read our publication. Belgian, Japanese, Argentinian, and Canadian societies, as well as the International Society for Fracture Repair, have all made JOT their journal as well. Our goal has always been to develop a forum to answer questions and solve problems for physicians in our discipline of medicine, no matter where they may live. This issue of the Journal, then, marks a milestone for our publication. Seven scientific publications, one technique, and three case reports will be found in this issue. All of the scientific papers come from outside the U.S. and discuss a wide range of problems: forearm fractures (Italy), proximal humerus fractures (Turkey), spinal fractures (Israel), acetabular fractures (Sweden), knee dislocations (New Zealand), bone transport (South Korea), and issues with osteogenesis (England). The technique article and case reports originate from England, South Korea, and the U.S. The peer review process is blinded both to author and reviewer in our Journal. As any of you who have published in our Journal know, all manuscripts undergo a rigorous acceptance process, sometimes with multiple revisions, before that paper is finally ready for publication. The information in those accepted manuscripts must be useful and timely for the readership. Different countries experience different problems, and the solutions to those problems offer all our readers insights they may not have thought of in dealing with these issues. This is what makes an international forum so valuable. We applaud all of the authors from around the globe who submit manuscripts and have them published in our Journal. With this issue, the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma has truly become the international journal it was always meant to be. As always, happy reading! FIGUREFigure

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.310 · 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