MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093288358 · doi:10.1592/phco.24.11.964.36143

Pharmacoepidemiology I: A Review of Pharmacoepidemiologic Study Designs

2004· review· en· W2093288358 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria HospitalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacoepidemiologyObservational studyMedicineClinical study designResearch designRandomized controlled trialCohort studyClinical trialMedical physicsInternal medicinePharmacologyStatisticsMedical prescription

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is the first of two parts on pharmacoepidemiology, a relatively new science that explores drug efficacy or toxicity using large observational study designs. The number of pharmacoepidemiologic studies published in medical journals has increased, as these studies have explored drug-related questions that at times cannot be answered in randomized clinical trials. Four pharmacoepidemiologic study designs will be discussed that explore the association between a specific pharmacologic agent and a disease of interest: cohort studies, case-control studies, case-crossover studies, and case-time-control studies.

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)0.092
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0920.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.607
GPT teacher head0.583
Teacher spread0.024 · 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