MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114372264 · doi:10.1186/1752-1505-2-9

Users' guides to the medical literature: how to use an article about mortality in a humanitarian emergency

2008· article· en· W2114372264 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward J Mills, Francesco Checchi, James Orbinski, Michael J. Schull, Frederick M. Burkle, Chris Beyrer, Curtis Cooper, Colleen Hardy, Sonal Singh, Richard Garfield, Bradley A. Woodruff, Gordon Guyatt

Bibliographic record

VenueConflict and Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalOttawa HospitalSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersForeign Affairs and International Trade CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityCatholic Relief ServicesUniversity of TorontoWorld Health Organization
KeywordsPublic healthInterpretation (philosophy)Health services researchMedicineReading (process)DemocracyPublic relationsEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceLawNursingPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accurate interpretation of mortality surveys in humanitarian crises is useful for both public health responses and security responses. Recent examples suggest that few medical personnel and researchers can accurately interpret the validity of a mortality survey in these settings. Using an example of a mortality survey from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), we demonstrate important methodological considerations that readers should keep in mind when reading a mortality survey to determine the validity of the study and the applicability of the findings to their settings.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.214 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConflict and HealthSame topicHealth and Conflict StudiesFrench-language works237,207