MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Pyramid of Evidence‐Based Transfusion Medicine: Definitions and Concepts

2003· article· en· W2088421259 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy M. Heddle

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion Alternatives in Transfusion Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare cost, quality, practices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityCanadian Blood Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPyramid (geometry)Foundation (evidence)MedicineHealth careClinical PracticeKey (lock)Base (topology)Evidence-based medicineIntensive care medicineAlternative medicineFamily medicinePathologyComputer scienceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARy Evidence‐based medicine can be illustrated as a three‐dimensional pyramid where the base is anchored by the elements of: research evidence; patient's preferences and actions; the clinical state and circumstances related to the patient; and, economic and societal considerations. Linking the four corners of the pyramid base is the clinical expertise of the health care provider. The foundation for this pyramid is a well‐constructed clinical question: the “question” is the key to evidence‐based clinical decision‐making.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.011
Science and technology studies0.0030.029
Scholarly communication0.0150.022
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0060.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.727
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusion Alternatives in Transfusion MedicineSame topicHealthcare cost, quality, practicesFrench-language works237,207