Cohort Profile: The North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design (NA-ACCORD)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design (NA-ACCORD) was created as part of the International Epidemiologic Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) initiative. The IeDEA project establishes regional centres for the collection and harmonization of data and the establishment of an international research consortium to address unique and evolving HIV/AIDS research questions requiring the larger sample sizes that can be achieved by combining multiple cohorts. The IeDEA initiative provides a means to implement methodology to effectively pool collected data, thus providing a cost-effective way to generate large data sets to address high-priority research questions in a timely manner. It is frequently difficult to combine data collected under different protocols, and may not be as efficient as collecting predetermined and standardized data elements under a single protocol. By developing a proactive mechanism for the collection of key variables, the IeDEA initiative is designed to enhance the quality, cost-effectiveness and speed of observational cohort studies pertaining to HIV/AIDS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it