MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sexuality and Myocardial Infarction

2007· review· en· W2088018266 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueAJN American Journal of Nursing · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoginInternet privacyHealth careHealth informationWorld Wide WebComputer scienceComputer securityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Log in or Register Subscribe to journalSubscribe Get new issue alertsGet alerts Enter your Email address: Wolters Kluwer Health may email you for journal alerts and information, but is committed to maintaining your privacy and will not share your personal information without your express consent. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. Subscribe to eTOC Secondary Logo Journal Logo All Articles Images Videos Podcasts Blogs Advanced Search Toggle navigation Subscribe Register Login Articles & Issues Current IssueArchivesePub Ahead-of-Print Collections Acute/Critical CareContinuing EducationCOVID-19 Disaster and Emergency PreparednessEnvironmental Health and IssuesEthics Evidence-Based Practice, Step by StepFamily CaregiversFocus on DEIGeriatric NursingHolistic NursingIn The CommunityInfectious DiseaseInternational TopicsLegal ClinicMental HealthNurse WellbeingNursing Research, Step By StepNursing ResourcesPalliative CarePatient SafetyPolicy and PoliticsProfessional Development, Leadership and ScholarshipProfessional Partners Supporting Diverse Family Caregivers Across SettingsQI: Quality ImprovementResearchSocial Media and Information TechnologySpecial SupplementsStrip SavvySupporting Family Caregivers: No Longer Home AloneSystematic Reviews Step by StepTeaching For PracticeTransforming Care at the Bedside (TCAB)Uniforms (Nursing)Uniting States, Sharing StrategiesWomen's HealthWriting Resources Videos Videos WebinarsFor Authors Call for ManuscriptsSubmit a ManuscriptInformation for AuthorsLanguage Editing ServicesAuthor PermissionsOpen AccessLippincott® Preprints Journal Info About the JournalAdvertising and BusinessAward WinnersBook of the Year AwardsContact InfoEditorial BoardInformation for FacultyInformation for MediaInformation for Peer ReviewersLetters to the EditorNurse Faculty Scholars / AJN Mentored Writing AwardReprintsRights and PermissionsSubscription ServicesNurses: Submit Your Photos! All Articles Images Videos Podcasts Blogs Advanced Search

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.006

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAJN American Journal of NursingSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207