MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2125841330 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1041310

The exaggerated relations between diet, body weight and mortality: the case for a categorical data approach

2005· article· en· W2125841330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. Gilbert Welch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCategorical variableObservational studyMultivariate statisticsRelation (database)Multivariate analysisComputer scienceStatisticsOutcome (game theory)Data scienceMedicineData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate analysis has become a major statistical tool for medical research. It is most commonly used for adjustment — the process of correcting the main effect for multiple variables that confound the relation between exposure and outcome in an observational study. Any apparent relation

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)0.215
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.409
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2150.409
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0060.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
DomainMethods
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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→