MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101486921 · doi:10.1783/147118906778586598

Delphi method and nominal group technique in family planning and reproductive health research

2006· article· en· W2101486921 on OpenAlexaff
Edwin van Teijlingen, Emma Pitchforth, Caroline Bishop, Elizabeth Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsCoalition for Research in Women's Health
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsFamily planningReproductive healthMedicineDelphi methodDelphiNominal groupNominal group techniqueGroup (periodic table)Natural family planningResearch methodologyComputer sciencePopulationEnvironmental healthArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both the Delphi method and nominal group technique\noffer structured, transparent and replicable ways of\nsynthesising individual judgements and have been used\nextensively for priority setting and guideline development\nin health-related research including reproductive\nhealth. Within evidence-based practice they provide a\nmeans of collating expert opinion where little evidence\nexists.They are distinct from many other methods\nbecause they incorporate both qualitative and quantitative\napproaches. Both methods are inherently flexible; this\narticle also discusses other strengths and weaknesses of\nthese methods.

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)0.236
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.202
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2360.202
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.012
Science and technology studies0.0050.020
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.281 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations95
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health CareSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207