CRITIQUE DE LIVRE : Chemotherapy and Biotherapy Guidelines, and Recommendations for Practice, 4th Edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intitulé Chemotherapy and Biotherapy Guidelines, and Recommendations for Practice, 4th Edition (Lignes directrices relatives à la chimiothérapie et à la biothérapie, et recommandations pratiques, 4e édition), cet ouvrage aborde de manière exhaustive le sujet des traitements pharmacologiques contre le cancer et des pratiques infirmières connexes. Il s’agit d’une excellente ressource pour l’ensemble des infirmiers et infirmières en oncologie — des novices aux chevronnés — et pour ceux qui jouent un rôle de formation clinique. L’équipe d’auteurs et d’éditrices se compose d’un vaste éventail d’expertes et experts en oncologie, notamment des infirmières en oncologie, des gestionnaires, des éducateurs et des pharmaciens. Bien que la majorité des rédacteurs proviennent des États-Unis, on compte un auteur canadien dans l’équipe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.141 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.031 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".