MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087412088 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.060228

High-dose vitamin C therapy: Renewed hope or false promise?

2006· letter· en· W2087412088 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sarit Assouline

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2006
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicVitamin C and Antioxidants Research
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
FundersLady Davis Institute for Medical ResearchJewish General HospitalMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineAlternative medicineCancerIntensive care medicineCancer therapyTraditional medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complementary and alternative medicine is commonly used by patients with cancer. Anywhere from 22% to 69% of cancer patients may take herbal medicine, medicinal teas, vitamins and minerals, and use visualization techniques.[1][1] There is often great pressure put on oncologists by their patients to

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicVitamin C and Antioxidants ResearchFrench-language works237,207