MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103029740 · doi:10.2522/ptj.2006.86.12.1716

Clinical Research in Practice: A Guide for the Bedside Scientist

2006· article· en· W2103029740 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Case Reports and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical PracticeMedical educationHealth carePsychologyMedicineNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Houser J, Bokovoy J. Sudbury, MA 01776, Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2006, paperback, 277 pp, illus, ISBN: 0-7637-3875-1, $42.95. Clinical Research in Practice is a primer of techniques for the beginning clinical researcher. Written by nursing faculty, it encourages all health care professionals to understand and contribute to the evidence that supports clinical practice. This book uses a straightforward approach to provide clinicians with the basic information required to carry out clinical research studies. The examples and case studies in the book focus on nursing issues, but can be readily applied to physical therapy clinical research. Although the book presents information in an uncomplicated manner, the text includes the major topics that should be present in such a primer. Part …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.328 · 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