MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108743111 · doi:10.4155/bio.14.258

Justifying The Lack of Incurred Sample Reproducibility in A Study: Considerations and Strategies

2015· article· en· W2108743111 on OpenAlexaff
Sofi Gagnon-Carignan, Sylvain Lachance, Audrey Saint-Laurent, Mariève Gendron, Ann Lévesque

Bibliographic record

VenueBioanalysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsinVentiv Health Clinical
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineSample (material)Agency (philosophy)AccountingReproducibilityBusinessMedicinePathologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2012 with the issuance of its Guideline on Bioanalytical Method Validation, the European Medicine Agency (EMA) made the incurred sample reproducibility (ISR) assessment a requirement for studies to be submitted to European authorities. Since then 2012, European agencies have started to issue deficiencies to pharmaceutical companies for lack of ISRs in studies submitted recently but performed prior to the issuance of the 2012 Guideline. It now becomes the applicant's responsibility to justify scientifically the departure from the new guideline even for less recent studies. This article details the different strategies to provide an adequate justification for the absence of ISR data in studies performed prior to February 2012 but submitted to European agencies after that date.

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)0.769
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.773
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.7690.773
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.021
Scholarly communication0.0160.011
Open science0.0110.011
Research integrity0.0220.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioanalysisSame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207