← all works
Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.
Canadian funderA Canadian agency funded it. The work may carry no Canadian affiliation at all.
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
Opus teacher head0.984
GPT teacher head0.731
- Teacher spread
- 0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
David Moher and colleagues from the EQUATOR network offer guidance and recommended steps for developing health research reporting guidelines.
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.
The record
- Venue
- PLoS Medicine
- Topic
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Field
- Decision Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- Ottawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
- Funders
- Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UKUniversity of Ottawa
- Keywords
- MedicineMEDLINEFamily medicineData sciencePolitical scienceComputer science
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes