MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128110408 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.090548

Substituting placebo for established, effective therapy: Why not?

2010· review· en· W2128110408 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Shelley Shapiro, Dean Fergusson, Kathleen Cranley Glass

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPain Management and Placebo Effect
Canadian institutionsOttawa Public HealthJewish General HospitalMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPlaceboMedicineComputer scienceAlternative medicineIntensive care medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The answer to the question of “Why not?” would seem relatively straightforward: substituting placebo for established, effective therapy is always ethically questionable and usually ethically inappropriate, and therefore we should not do it. That position finds support in numerous guidelines,

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicPain Management and Placebo EffectFrench-language works237,207