MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2131854677 · doi:10.1017/s0714980800014069

W.D. Molloy and P.J. Caldwell. Alzheimer's Disease. Toronto, ON: Key Porter, 1998.

2000· article· fr· W2131854677 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michèle Gagnon, Lisa Sweet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2000
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉ Dans leur livre, Molloy et Caldwell présentent un examen complet et accessible de la maladie d'Alzheimer et des démences connexes. Dans un premier temps, les auteurs expliquent les bases organiques fondamentales de la maladie puis décrivent les signes et les symptômes et les méthodes diagnostiques de la maladie. Ils présentent une excellente description des systèmes de la mémoire en cause dans la maladie d'Alzheimer et rapprochent l'information des blancs de mémoire courants. Les chapitres suivants traitent des questions émotives et fonctionnelles auxquelles font souvent face les personnes affectées par cette maladie et ceux qui en prennent soin. En conclusion, les auteurs abordent plusieurs points d'ordre juridique et traitent de solutions de rechange au traitement traditionnel. Le livre prétente également une liste utile de médicaments non presents, de médicaments que l'on peut obtenirpar ordonnance et un glossaire pratique. Le livre est parsemé d'éléments hors-texte qui attirent l'attention sur certains points. De lecture facile, le livre s'adresse au grand public et constitue une excellente source de références pour les personnes qui doivent prendre soin d'un être cher atteint de la maladie d'Alzheimer.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.061

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→